“Bong Hits 4 Jesus” is a meaningless expression, idiotic, and was first thought of by an 18-year old high school senior. But that does not mean that a high schooler can say it anymore.
High school senior Joe Frederick held up a banner with the inane words in 2002 but a decision by the Supreme Court limited student free-expression rights in public schools.
The banner with the infamous “Bong” message was held aloft while students and faculty were gathered to watch the Olympic torch pass by his school in Juneau, Alaska.
Unfortunately for Mr. Frederick, the principal, Deborah Morse, asked him to take the banner down, and Frederick refused. Morse believed the message was a promotion of illegal drugs in violation of school policy and the Court has ruled against students advocating drug use. She confiscated the banner and later suspended Frederick for 10 days. Frederick sued.
With this decision, the Court sided with the principal.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Samuel Alito underscores the narrow scope of the decision, claiming as he does, that the ruling does not restrict the right of students to comment on political or social issues, including debates about drug laws.
On the other hand, the dissent, written by Justice John Paul Stevens and joined by Justices David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, describes the decision as a “ham-handed, categorical approach” that is “deaf to the constitutional imperative to permit unfettered debate, even among high school students, about the wisdom of the war on drugs or of legalizing marijuana for medicinal use.”
This is a bad decision which restricts unfettered, public free speech by juveniles.
In an odd twist, if the banner had stated, "Wine Sips 4 Jesus," Frederick could have been interpreted as promoting an illegal drug (alchohol) for minors, or, he could be advocating imbibing sacramental wine, as in a Roman Catholic Mass. Should he be restricted in discussing another element or, more troubling, have another freedom, the exercise of religion, restricted?
The decision is in very troubling waters for freedom of expression. The Court's ruling more narrowly limits the free-speech decision in Tinker v. Des Moines, the test for virtually all student speech cases since 1969.
Regardless if Frederick was referring to a song, "Bonghits For Jesus" written by a band, Twice Baked in the 1990's, or, as he claimed it was a meaningless statement, I wouldn't want to see artists limited by a Court ruling in any case.
Posts
