"Bong Hits for Jesus" Banner Torn Down

[IronGhost]

"Free Speech or Half Baked Lawsuit?"

Can Schools Censor "Non-Disruptive" Jokes? (Dudley M. Brooks)

When a joke is taken seriously, that's irony, but when it's taken so seriously that the Supreme Court is called upon to determine how future jokes can be made, that's meta-irony. And yet, there it was, a Borat-like moment in the most hallowed of judicial halls: the Morse V. Frederick case. At question in the narrow interpretation: Was it wrong for an Alaska high school principal to tear down her student's banner during an off-campus field trip because it read "Bong Hits 4 Jesus?" And, despite the absurdity of hearing justices parse the minutia of that "sophomoric" prank, what was at stake in the wider scope could not have been more serious: the regulation of free speech within America's public schools.

Further heightening the irony, though, is that no clear solution presented itself. In reviewing the Court's transcript and the multitude of reader comments from yesterday, there were two arguments that struck me as fundamental to this case broadly. First, since the Court's decision may set a precedent for the extent to which students can dissent with their schools, will a decision favoring student Frederick create a situation in which teachers are unable to keep order for fear they will be sued? Second, will a decision favoring Principal Morse create a situation in which schools can punish any student who openly disagrees with their "mission," no matter how oppressive that "mission" is?

Students Rally Outside High Court (By Andrea Bruce -- The Washington Post)

Since neither option is appealing, a more narrow focus on the specifics of this case is necessary to further define what constitutes disruption and free speech. And this is where the oral arguments become really ironic. It appears that because Frederick's banner was a joke, and not a political statement (protected under Tinker V. Des Moines), he might be on shakier ground. The justices seemed to hint that if in the school's mind he was encouraging drug use rather than advocating its legalization, tearing down the banner may have been justified. That is to say, had it read "Vote Yes For Bong Hits" or "Give Pot A Chance" or "Make Marijuana Mandatory," he may have been better protected. However, as one reader noted -- and this case seems to exemplify -- humor and satire that point out absurdity are often vehicles for political statements. Take away students' capacity to mock authority, and you undermine political expression. Protect it, and every class clown will test and push the limits further. Therefore, it would seem no matter which way the Court leans, the joke's on them, and us.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/offbeat/200...hits_4_j_2.html

[NiCkC818]

OMG the end of the world is coming... far left liberals and the Christian right are coming together...