Supreme Court hears "Bong Hits 4 Jesus"

03/19/2007 04:22:13 PM · #1

LA Times Story

Should students have the same 1st amendment rights as adults or authority figures? I say hell yeah they should. Especially off campus. I really don't think this should have ever reached the supreme court but it did. I pray that they uphold the first amendment. We can't afford to have our rights trampled any more than we already have.

03/20/2007 12:09:28 AM · #2

Sometimes politics (and legal proceedings) makes strange bedfellows. From the New York Times:

"While it is hardly surprising to find the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Coalition Against Censorship on Mr. Frederickâ��s side, it is the array of briefs from organizations that litigate and speak on behalf of the religious right that has lifted Morse v. Frederick out of the realm of the ordinary.

The groups include the American Center for Law and Justice, founded by the Rev. Pat Robertson; the Christian Legal Society; the Alliance Defense Fund, an organization based in Arizona that describes its mission as 'defending the right to hear and speak the Truth'; the Rutherford Institute, which has participated in many religion cases before the court; and Liberty Legal Institute, a nonprofit law firm 'dedicated to the preservation of First Amendment rights and religious freedom.'"

03/20/2007 12:12:50 AM · #3

I don't think freedom of speech would extend into a school. It may be a public school, but schools definitely aren't considered public places in the eyes of the law.

03/20/2007 12:16:18 AM · #4

It was not on school grounds.

03/20/2007 12:22:02 AM · #5

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

It was not on school grounds.

I see that now... lol

03/20/2007 12:24:12 AM · #6

The article claims that it was a 'school event' though. School rules would apply...

03/20/2007 12:28:17 AM · #7

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

The article claims that it was a 'school event' though. School rules would apply...

I guess that is why the SC (LOL SC) is hearing the case. But I think free speech is free speech. Notwithstanding the logical arguments of yelling â��fireâ�� in a crowded place thus causing the potential for injury and the like.

Message edited by author 2007-03-20 00:29:10.

03/20/2007 12:29:59 AM · #8

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by jmsetzler:
The article claims that it was a 'school event' though. School rules would apply...

I guess that is why the SC (LOL SC) is hearing the case. But I think free speech is free speech. Notwithstanding the logical arguments of yelling â��fireâ�� in a crowded place thus causing the potential for injury and the like.

My response is too long.. i'm gonna put it in my blog.. lol

03/20/2007 12:31:36 AM · #9

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

My response is too long.. i'm gonna put it in my blog.. lol

I'll stay tuned. :-)

//www.setzler.net/redneckblog/2007/03/19/bong-hits-4-jesus/

03/20/2007 12:51:29 AM · #10

03/20/2007 01:04:40 AM · #11

jmsetzler,

Regarding Blogger Ed Brayton of Dispatches from the Culture Wars claims, in opposition to the LA Times article, "[t]his is the case where a student was suspended for putting up a banner that said 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus' during a parade that was not at the school and not a mandatory event for students to attend." If it's a non-mandatory event, I would agree with Brayton that school rules would not continue to apply to student off school grounds regardless of whether the students were at the event or not. For instance, could you hold students responsible under school rules for holding the same sign at a different parade four blocks away at the same time?

03/20/2007 01:12:05 AM · #12

Originally posted by milo655321:

I only had what the LA Times article stated. It said nothing about mandatory or not.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

03/20/2007 07:19:23 AM · #13

//www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-03-20-alaska-fund_N.htm?csp=34

I think I found out where this kid went to work after high school...

NVPhoto

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/20/2007 09:29:21 AM · #14

All the responsibility for how this escalated lies w/ the principal. It was a banner that students thought would be funny, big deal. The parade would pass and it would be over, nothing really press worthy yet. This principal decides that he needs to make a huge deal and rip the banner out of the kids hands and send them to the office to be suspended. then he doubles the suspension because the kid quotes his first amendment rights... what an idiot he is. Of course this kid is going to now make a big deal and get a lawyer. The more it escalates the happier it makes this kid because he knows that he has a chance of beating the school system in court.

If the principal just let it go, maybe gave them a little talk about choices you make, this would have been over long ago. School admins need to pick their battles and decide between students harmlessly expressing themselves and actual problems. I would be willing to bet that this kid was a good student, socially popular, with very strong views of rights and fairness.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

03/20/2007 09:41:10 AM · #15

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

//www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-03-20-alaska-fund_N.htm?csp=34

I think I found out where this kid went to work after high school...

Actually, I believe he's teaching kids somewhere in China.

03/20/2007 10:09:15 AM · #16

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by jmsetzler:
//www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-03-20-alaska-fund_N.htm?csp=34

I think I found out where this kid went to work after high school...

Actually, I believe he's teaching kids somewhere in China.

How appropriate :)

Chinese kids need to know about freedom of speech :)

03/20/2007 10:10:21 AM · #17

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

I would be willing to bet that this kid was a good student, socially popular, with very strong views of rights and fairness.

Possibly... those traits sometimes go along with drug abusers. I'm not 100% confident about the 'good student' portion. IMO, that went out the window with the banner...

NVPhoto

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/20/2007 10:18:21 AM · #18

out the window with the banner....

Are you saying that because he is advocating pot he can't be a good student. I would bet he is. My reasons are... he planned and executed his prank pretty well, he stood up to the principal by quoting his first amendment right, he countered the suspension with legal counsel and a law suit, his parents supported his actions of protecting his right to free speech. All these traits are not that of a "drug abuser", the drug abuser would have taken the suspension as 10 days to sit home and rip bong hits.

03/20/2007 10:27:43 AM · #19

Either way, itâ��s idle speculation on both your parts and shouldnâ��t weigh as evidence as to whether his First Amendment rights were violated. The right to hold the sign (or the right of the principle to suspended the student for holding it) apply to the valedictorian as well as the failing student. What kind of student he is, as I see it, is irrelevant to facts of the case.

03/20/2007 05:40:12 PM · #20

"Starr, joined by the Bush administration, also asked the court to adopt a broad rule that could essentially give public schools the right to clamp down on any speech with which they disagree. That argument did not appear to have widespread support among the justices."

Ken Starr!!!! What a loser! (Thank god for the First amendment that lets me say that.)

The bold type in the quote is the crux of the biscuit. If they do that to students who is to say that we are not next.

03/20/2007 06:25:23 PM · #21

For those interested, here is the transcript of yesterday's oral arguments.

03/20/2007 07:14:53 PM · #22

Originally posted by milo655321:

For those interested, here is the transcript of yesterday's oral arguments.

Thanks now I want to read the briefs. Looks like it could be a nail biter.

03/20/2007 09:12:39 PM · #23

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

out the window with the banner....

Are you saying that because he is advocating pot he can't be a good student.

No.