Monday, June 25, 2007

Supreme Court Rules Against Student In "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" Free Speech Case

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court tightened limits on student speech Monday, ruling against a high school student and his 14-foot-long "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner.

Schools may prohibit student expression that can be interpreted as advocating drug use, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court in a 5-4 ruling.

Joseph Frederick unfurled his homemade sign on a winter morning in 2002, as the Olympic torch made its way through Juneau, Alaska, en route to the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

Frederick said the banner was a nonsensical message that he first saw on a snowboard. He intended the banner to proclaim his right to say anything at all.

His principal, Deborah Morse, said the phrase was a pro-drug message that had no place at a school-sanctioned event. Frederick denied that he was advocating for drug use.

"The message on Frederick's banner is cryptic," Roberts said. "But Principal Morse thought the banner would be interpreted by those viewing it as promoting illegal drug use, and that interpretation is plainly a reasonable one."

Morse suspended the student, prompting a federal civil rights lawsuit.

Students in public schools don't have the same rights as adults, but neither do they leave their constitutional protections at the schoolhouse gate, as the court said in a landmark speech-rights ruling from Vietnam era.

The court has limited what students can do in subsequent cases, saying they may not be disruptive or lewd or interfere with a school's basic educational mission.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Seems stare decisis is a thing of the past,something this(5 members exclusively- Roberts,Alito,Thompson,Scalia and swing vote-Kennedy)court trashes. What about Texas v Johnson, Tinker--Hmmm? No one has mentioned in Alaska that cannibus is not a legal matter-minimalized; thus, making Fredrick's statement Political-Hence, The most safeguarded type of speech---I guess the 1st Amendment only applies to the majority opinion in this court. I am certain the framers would question this one.

Anonymous said...

Freedom of speech is for the minority opinion. A sense of protection for dissent. Alaska is lax regarding marijuana use;hence,Political Speech. Political Speech is the highest tier of protection. Fredricks is 18-adult off school property and did not attend school that day.This concludes it was not a school function. What's next?
The court overlooked stare decisis
Johnson, Tinker and Barnette.