Final answer:
The justices' opinions in Texas v. Johnson aimed to protect symbolic speech under the First Amendment and create a legal precedent. Flag burning was deemed protected political expression, illustrating the judiciary's role in preserving individual rights amid societal disagreement.
Step-by-step explanation:
The purposes of the justices' opinions in Texas v. Johnson were to interpret the First Amendment freedoms and establish legal precedent. In the 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that flag burning as an act of protest was a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment. The case set a precedent that the government could not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds it offensive or disagreeable.
The majority opinion defended free speech rights, arguing that the expressive conduct of burning the flag was protected political expression. The dissenting opinions focused on upholding the authority of the state to enforce flag desecration laws. This case illustrated the judiciary's role in balancing individual rights against societal interests and confirmed the protective reach of the First Amendment when it comes to political speech, even when that speech is controversial.