High court hears 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus' case
By The Associated Press
03.19.07
WASHINGTON — A high school principal was acting reasonably and in accord with the school's anti-drug mission when she suspended a student for displaying a "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner, her lawyer told the Supreme Court today.

"The message here is, in fact, critical," the lawyer, former independent counsel Kenneth Starr, said during a lively argument about whether the principal violated the constitutional rights of the student.

On the other side, attorney Douglas Mertz of Juneau, Alaska, urged the justices to see the case as being about free speech, not drugs.

The dispute between Joseph Frederick, who in 2002 was a high school senior, and Principal Deborah Morse has become an important test of the limits on the free speech rights of students. The case is Morse v. Frederick, 06-278.

Justice Stephen Breyer, addressing Mertz, said he was struggling with the case because a ruling in Frederick's favor could encourage students to go to absurd lengths to test those limits.

A ruling for Morse, however, "may really limit free speech," Breyer said.

The Bush administration, backing Morse, wants the Court to adopt a broad rule that could essentially give public schools the right to clamp down on any speech with which it disagrees.

Scores of students waited outside the court early today for a chance to listen to the arguments.

"I would never do it, but at the same time, it's free speech," said Chaim Frenkel, 17, of Silver Spring, Md. Frenkel was one of 13 seniors and their teacher from the Melvin J. Berman Hebrew Academy who arrived at the court at 4:30 a.m.

Natasha Braithwaite, 20, a junior at Columbia Union College in Takoma Park, Md., got in line at 7 a.m. with a definite opinion about the case. "In every possible way, his First Amendment rights were violated," Braithwaite said.

Frederick was a high school senior in Juneau when he decided to display the banner at an off-campus, school-sanctioned event to watch the Olympic torch pass through the city on its way to the 2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City.

Morse believed his "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner was a pro-drug message that schools should not tolerate. She suspended Frederick for 10 days. Frederick sued Morse, and that case now is before the court.

Frederick acknowledged he was trying to provoke a reaction from school administrators with whom he had feuded, but he denied that he was speaking out in favor of drugs or anything other than free speech. A bong is a water pipe that is used to smoke marijuana.

"I waited until the perfect moment to unveil it, as the TV cameras (following the torch relay) passed," Frederick said.

Morse and the Juneau school district argue that schools will be powerless to discipline students who promote illegal drugs if the court sides with Frederick. The Bush administration, other school boards and anti-drug school groups are supporting Morse.

Frederick, now 23, counters that students could be silenced if the Court reverses the appellate ruling. A wide assortment of conservative and liberal advocacy groups are behind Frederick.

In a Vietnam War-era case, the Court backed high school student anti-war protesters who wore armbands to class. Since then, though, the court has sanctioned curtailing student speech when it is disruptive to a school's educational mission, plainly offensive or part of a school-sponsored activity like a student newspaper.

A federal appeals court called Frederick's message "vague and nonsensical" in ruling that his civil rights had been violated. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also said Morse would have to compensate Frederick for her actions because she should have known they violated the Constitution.

Frederick, who teaches English and studies Mandarin in China, was not expected at the high court for the argument. Two years after the banner incident, Frederick pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of selling marijuana, according to Texas court records.


Previous
Justices to hear 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus' case
Juneau, Alaska, school board appealing 9th Circuit ruling that teen's free speech was infringed when he was disciplined for showing pro-drug banner off-campus. 12.01.06

Related

Court may untangle student-speech cases with 'Bong Hits'
By Tony Mauro But whether Morse v. Frederick will end confusion for school administrators or add to it is far from clear. 12.04.06

<a href="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/offbeat/2007/03/high_court_takes_bong_hits_4_j.html" target="_blank">High Court Takes "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" Case, Toke Two
"Free Speech or Half Baked Lawsuit?"</a>



Can Schools Censor "Non-Disruptive" Jokes? (Dudley M. Brooks) Rehashing one of my more popular articles from last year, the Supreme Court, today, takes up the case of Morse v. Frederick. Considered by some to be the "most important student free-speech conflict to reach the Supreme Court since the height of the Vietnam War," it could decide how and to what extent schools can regulate their students' jokes. The case first sparked controversy in 2002, when high school senior Joseph Frederick unfurled a 14-foot banner reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" during a field trip to watch the Olympic torch pass through Juneau, Alaska. By his own admission, he did it for the juvenile, albeit innocent, reasons that it was funny and it would get him on TV. His principal at the time, Deborah Morse, did not see the humor, but probably noticed the TV cameras and asked him to remove the banner. When he refused, she tore down the sign and suspended him for 10 days. But, potentially seeing an even better opportunity to get on TV, Frederick sued, alleging that she had violated his right to freedom of speech. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with him, ruling that school officials may not "punish and censor non-disruptive" speech by students at school-sponsored events simply because they object to the message.

Before Frederick could collect any damages though, former Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr (remember the definition of "is"?) jumped in on behalf of the school board and urged the High Court to reexamine the decision. According to his petition, "this case presents the Court with a much-needed opportunity to resolve a sharp conflict among federal courts (and to eliminate confusion on the part of school boards, administrators, teachers, and students) over whether the First Amendment permits regulation of student speech when such speech is advocating or making light of illegal substances," (presumably marijuana).


"Bong Hits" Make Strange Bedfellows (James A. Parcell)

But is it just about "illegal substances" ("Guns, Cigarettes, and Doctor Prescribed Oxycontin 4 Jesus" would be okay?), or could this ruling allow schools to tear down any banners they simply don't like? And this is where the issue becomes slightly more bizarre. The New York Times reported yesterday that "organizations that litigate and speak on behalf of the religious right" (i.e., ones you'd expect to back Ken Starr) have thrown in a number of briefs on Fredrick's behalf. These groups even include Pat Robertson's American Center for Law and Justice, which "is dependent upon God and the resources He provides" to defend religious freedom. So what appeared at first to be a political slam dunk for social conservatives has now become something of an ideological key party, with the religious right jumping into bed with the ACLU and the National Coalition Against Censorship. I suppose all is fair in love and culture war.

And so, against this increasingly confusing backdrop, all eyes (bloodshot and otherwise) turn to the Supreme Court as it begins its examination of possibly the most bizarre and important First Amendment case in a generation.

This was all over NPR yesterday.

The kid himself said it was an experiment, so I would imagine that he expected this kind of trouble.

Me, I think he abused his right to free expression by using the message "Bong hits for Jesus" to propel himself into the limelight. I guess I see it as a prime opportunity squandered.