Bong Hits 4 Stevens, Souter, and Ginsburg

In more Supreme Court of the United States news, the right of school administrators to keep students from promoting illegal drug use was upheld.

Naturally, libs are troubled by that as a limitation on the free speech of students.
From The Washington Post:

The Supreme Court affirmed wide authority for school administrators to regulate students' speech today, allowing principals to punish pupils who make any in-school speech or demonstration that may "reasonably be viewed" as promoting illegal drug use.

The finding came in a case in which a Juneau public high school teacher gave Joseph Frederick a 10-day suspension for unfurling a banner reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" as the school was gathering outside to watch the Olympic Torch Relay pass in 2002. Joseph, who has since graduated, sued the suspension was a violation of his constitutional right to free speech.

Though the Banner's message was admittedly ambiguous, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the court majority that the school's principal, Deborah Morse, was not wrong to conclude that it promoted the use of an illegal substance, which was contrary to the Juneau school system's policy.

The dangers of illegal drug use are "serious," Roberts wrote, and the "First Amendment does not require schools to tolerate at school events student expression that contributes to those dangers," Roberts wrote.

To those conservatives frustrated with President Bush: The nomination of Roberts to the Supreme Court was a tremendous accomplishment of his administration.

The "First Amendment does not require schools to tolerate at school events student expression that contributes to those dangers (illegal drug use)."
Exactly.

...Justice John Paul Stevens, joined by Justices David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissented.

Stevens wrote that Frederick had raised a "nonsense banner," which advocated nothing, legal or illegal, and that the court's opinion could be read to permit broad censorship.

Stevens is clueless.

"Bong hits" advocates nothing?

That's absolutely ridiculous.

I don't think schools should be forced to allow students to promote the use of bongs.

I see no problem with a banner that read "Bong hits 4 Jesus" being removed from a school-sponsored and supervised event. In fact, I would consider the principal derelict for allowing the student to go unpunished after he defied warnings to put it away.

Would the people upset about the "Bong hits 4 Jesus" banner being taken down also condone kids unfurling a racist banner?

Would people whine if school administrators removed a banner that read, "N-word 4 Jesus"? How about one that read, "I hate gays"?

Would administrators be seen as treading on the students' right to free speech in that case?

I highly doubt it.

Free speech must be exercised responsibly.

Schools, even public schools, are in the business of teaching students to become functioning, productive members of society, correct?

Administrators would be failing in their mission if they set no limits for students, including limits on their freedom of expression.


Joseph Frederick can raise his banner somewhere else, not at a school event.