Setting an assumed baseline here, the AP article doesn't explicitly say what the flow flags state, just vulgar insults towards Biden. Let's assume it's "Fuck Joe Biden" as that seems to be popular among some. From Cohen v. CA, Justice Harlan wrote
"He reasoned that Cohen’s display of profanity could not be classified as
obscenity, because it was not “erotic.” He also determined that the language could not be considered
fighting words — another unprotected form of expression — because it was not directed at a particular recipient. “No individual actually or likely to be present could reasonably have regarded the words on appellant’s jacket as a direct personal insult,” he wrote."
If my assumption is right, then the language is directed at a particular recipient, and I would assume not protected speech. From that same case, Justice Harlan also wrote, which is the crux of my argument
“[O]ne man’s vulgarity is another’s lyric” and “because government officials cannot make principled distinctions in this area that the Constitution leaves matters of taste and style so largely to the individual.”
Let the guy argue what is and is not vulgar all day long. Argue until he's out of breath that insulting someone not present is protected. But flying Fuck Joe Biden flags is an insult, I just cannot see it as political speech.
--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody
