'Bong Hits 4 Jesus': Student Protest Goes to Supreme Court
Legal Experts Call Case Most Significant Student Free Speech Case Since the Height of Vietnam War
(http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=2953653)
By SUSAN DONALDSON JAMES
March 15, 2007 — - Joseph Frederick, a student rebel halfway through his senior year of high school, tried the patience of his principal when he displayed a drug-referenced sign reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" at a public parade in Juneau, Alaska, in 2002.
The 18-year-old had fashioned a 14-foot paper banner, which he held as the Olympic torch passed across the street from his high school on a national relay leading up to the 2002 winter games in Salt Lake City.
Frederick said he wanted to capture the attention of TV cameras -- and the ire of his principal.
Principal Deborah Morse, who had previously disciplined Frederick for other acts of protest, confiscated the banner and suspended Frederick, sparking a feud that has gone all the way to the Supreme Court.
Monday, the Court will hear arguments on Morse v. Frederick, in what legal experts say could be the most significant case on student free speech since the days of Vietnam War protests.
At stake is the 1969 landmark ruling Tinker v. Des Moines, which said that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."
Since then, the Court has narrowed that ruling, giving schools the right to censor speech to maintain order and protect students from harmful messages.
------------------
Ahhh, so now I'm beginning to understand why the art of debate and protest is dying and why so many students don't ever know how to stand up for what they believe in until it's too late.
How can we shelter kids, and then expect them to have a clue as to how to handle themselves?
Content of the message aside, I'm wondering if this is being handled in the best way?
On the one hand, this student's intent was to rile up his principle; should this be a matter for the federal government? Or shouldn't the school and local governments be taking care of this?
On the other hand, students have every right to protest their beliefs, and the school punishing him for doing this thing, even if his intent was focused on riling up his principle, does seriously violate his right to free speech.
But how can you promote free speech in the schools and try to maintain a tolerant atmosphere?
What do you think, is this going too far, or not far enough? What impact do you see coming from this?
Not just my old high school, but my whole town was very keen on crushing any sort of protest. Except, of course, our local CPC doing their annual pro-life march. The only sort of protest we ever got away with at school was the GLSEN Day of Silence to support gay students that experience harassment. It was kind of sad because students would have been a lot more aware of current issues if they were discussed in our school newspaper or protested at our school gates.
Common sense is as rare as genius. ~Emerson
"Not just my old high school, but my whole town was very keen on crushing any sort of protest."
I find that a little sad. My high school was very active in protests; in fact, many of the teachers emphasized the importance of protesting and how to protest without breaking any laws, going overboard, or leaving your self open for attacks. My Government II class focused on protesting and peaceful assemblies.
All of these came in very handy whenever the school board tried to pull something that we students didn't like; uniforms, not allowing girls on the football/wrestling teams, taking the salad bar out of our lunch room and off the lunch menu, etc. And many of the values I learned then stay with me now.
---------------------------
"Dream as though you'll live forever, but live as though there's no tomorrow" --James Dean
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/fanaile-essence
My schools shuns any protest. I remember the class of 2006 had a prom and male that dressed like a female wore a dress. The school kneew he was going to wear a dress because he dresses like that. But when he came to prom, the administrators escorted him out of prom. In other cases like my economic class food project. The school board did not want to hear the truth about how bad our school lunches were so that told us not to publish our report. There is a lot of censorship in America. Sooner or later, people must realize that if someone isn't bothering them, they need to let him or her live his or her own life.
If newspapers would not even publish that cartoon the Muslims went nuts over, maybe the Christians deserve the same respect.
The kid was not fighting for beliefs. He was being a jerk.
Something that seems to have been overlooked in the furuor over this incindent is the fact that Joseph Frederick was not on school grounds when he displayed his sign, nor was it displayed during school hours.
Whether or not you might think that this kid's message is "stupid" is irrelevant. The issue is really a question of why they prinicpal thought she had the right to punish a student for something that a student did PRIVATELY, on his own time and away from the school.
Here is an excerpt from the Ninth Circuit Court's decision...
> There is no genuine issue of fact material to the decision.
> Frederick’s display was not in a class. Frederick and the
> other students who displayed the sign did not participate
> in any of the disorderly conduct of the students who threw
> snowballs or plastic Coca-Cola miniature sample bottles.
> The school principal and school board do not claim that the
> display disrupted or was expected to disrupt any classroom
> work. They concede that their objection to the display, and
> the reason why the principal ripped down the banner, was
> not concern that it would cause disruption but that its
> message would be understood as advocating or promoting
> illegal drug use. Frederick says that the words were just
> nonsense meant to attract television cameras because they
> were funny. We nevertheless proceed on the basis that the
> banner expressed a positive sentiment about marijuana use,
> however vague and nonsensical.
>
> Thus, the question comes down to whether a school may, in
> the absence of concern about disruption of educational
> activities, punish and censor non-disruptive, off-campus
> speech by students during school-authorized activities
> because the speech promotes a social message contrary to
> the one favored by the school. The answer under
> controlling, long-existing precedent is plainly “No.”
>
> http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/11BBADA028A095D58825712D00016761/$file/0335701.pdf?openelement
A student is still a citizen, and they do not loose their constitutional rights simply because they are young.
percivale
Also, the message "bong hits for jesus" is pretty inane. If they were serious about protest, they would have come up with something a little more intelligent to say.