Bong Hits for Jesus!

AReasonableLu's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2007-06-20
User is offlineOffline
Bong Hits for Jesus!

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court ruled against a former high school student Monday in the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner case -- a split decision that limits students' free speech rights. Joseph Frederick was 18 when he unveiled the 14-foot paper sign on a public sidewalk outside his Juneau, Alaska, high school in 2002.

Principal Deborah Morse confiscated it and suspended Frederick. He sued, taking his case all the way to the nation's highest court. The justices ruled 6-3 that Frederick's free speech rights were not violated by his suspension over what the majority's written opinion called a "sophomoric" banner. "It was reasonable for (the principal) to conclude that the banner promoted illegal drug use-- and that failing to act would send a powerful message to the students in her charge," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court's majority.

(Opinionexternal link) Roberts added that while the court has limited student free speech rights in the past, young people do not give up all their First Amendment rights when they enter a school. Roberts was supported by Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer, and Samuel Alito. Breyer noted separately he would give Morse qualified immunity from the lawsuit, but did not sign onto the majority's broader free speech limits on students. In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said, "This case began with a silly nonsensical banner, (and) ends with the court inventing out of whole cloth a special First Amendment rule permitting the censorship of any student speech that mentions drugs, so long as someone could perceive that speech to contain a latent pro-drug message."

He was backed by Justices David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. At issue was the discretion schools should be allowed to limit messages that appear to advocate illegal drug use. "Bong," as noted in the appeal filed with the justices, "is a slang term for drug paraphernalia."

The incident occurred in January 2002 just outside school grounds when the Olympic torch relay was moving through the Alaska capital on its way to the Salt Lake City, Utah, Winter Games. Though he was standing on a public sidewalk, the school argued Frederick was part of a school-sanctioned event, because students were let out of classes and accompanied by their teachers.

Morse ordered the senior to take down the sign, but he refused. That led to a 10-day suspension for violating a school policy on promoting illegal drug use.


I'm going to call bullshit on this one. Any citizen of the United States is allowed to stand on public property with a sign that says "Bong Hits for Jesus". He was suspended for 10 days?!! I guess the Supreme Court must know best. Who cares if it was "sophomoric". He didn't actually whip out a bong with the Lord printed on the side. He didn't have a bong, period. How far does school policy apply if you are off school grounds? Feet? Miles? Field trips? I'm glad he stood up for his right to be an idiot teenager with a sign that says whatever the hell he wants it to say. If the WBC gets to stand around funerals that say "GOD HATES FAGS"... what does that tell kids? What about "THANK GOD FOR KATRINA"? They get away with it on public property.

“The four most over-rated things in life are champagne, lobster, anal sex and picnics.”
-Christopher Hitchens

"I don't believe in God, but I'm afraid of Him."
-Gabriel Garcia Marquez

Rational VIP!
D-cubed's picture
Posts: 715
Joined: 2007-01-04
User is offlineOffline
That means the Supreme

That means the Supreme Court ruled that students cannot advocate religion or express religious opinions on school grounds or at school events.  Now any school district that faces a lawsuit from a fundy about not being able to preach Jesus at a graduation has no recourse.  The narrow minded fundy Supreme Court must have not realized this but I expect they'll overturn themselves soon.

 On another bad note the Supreme Court ruled against the Freedom From Religion Foundation saying private citizens have no right to sue the government when the government provides funds to religious groups.

Two steps closer to a theocracy.