Posted on 03/11/2006 1:00:05 PM PST by wagglebee
An Alaska high school violated a student's free speech rights by suspending him after he unfurled a banner reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" across the street from the school, a federal court ruled on Friday.
Joseph Frederick, a student at Juneau-Douglas High School in Alaska, displayed the banner -- which refers to smoking marijuana -- in January 2002 to try to get on television as the Olympic torch relay was passing the school.
Principal Deborah Morse seized the banner and suspended the 18-year-old for 10 days, saying he had undermined the school's educational mission and anti-drug stance.
Friday's ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco overturned a decision by a federal court in Alaska that backed Frederick's suspension and said his rights were not violated.
The appeals court said the banner was protected speech because it did not disrupt school activity and was displayed off school grounds during a non-curricular activity.
"Public schools are instrumentalities of government, and government is not entitled to suppress speech that undermines whatever missions it defines for itself," Judge Andrew Kleinfeld wrote in the court's opinion.
The court also cleared the way for Frederick to seek damages, saying Morse was aware of relevant case law and should have known her actions violated his rights.
Didn't alaska recently approve medicinal bongs ?
Hmmm.. I would say that there were elements of both involved, but "one big epiphanic collapse" would be a much better description than a slow erosion.
The way I usually approach intellectual or philosophical topics of such magnitude is to collect as much information as possible and to contemplate it from as many angles as possible. Meanwhile, I tend to be rather good at running on autopilot, and letting the pieces fall into place largely in my subconscious. So, long as I kept myself within the relentless internal logic of Christianity, then everything seemed in order. As soon as I stepped outside the parameters, it all crumbled apart.
Once in a while I tend to have these flashes of vision, for lack of a better description, where all of a sudden it's as if I can see the entirety of a phenomenon all at once, with all its interlocking pieces spread out before my mind's eye, almost as if you've snapped the case off of a watch. With my erstwhile Christian faith, the 'epiphany' resulted from my study of history. One evening the last gears fell into place and I could 'see' how it situated in the flow of history: How it emerged, how it operated, what functions it played, and why it persisted.
And just like that it all fell apart for me conceptually. Once I stepped beyond its internal logic, the rest was all a self-evident chain of deduction.
I'll watch the clip in a couple hours. Thanks!
I saw "Proof" last night. Interesting movie. I liked it, while my brother fell asleep. It may have had something to do with its location being at my alma mater. The connecting dots came in ones and twos, and then in bursts, punctuated by periods of blockage. What did you think of it AD, if you saw it? Did any of it ring true, other than that heavy duty math types tend to be under stress?
I haven't seen Proof, but I just put it on my list. Right now I'm taking a break from the dreadful horror flick (Saw II) that I'm wondering why I rented..
<< Good thing he didn't display the Confederate flag. >>
Or a cartoon portrayal of the barbarians' at the gates furious false fuhrer, the mad-mullah mudhutmmud. In mufti maybe?
Can you cite any evidence that this law has ever been held to apply to the posting of banners, or are you again making up your "facts" as you go along?
I confess I'm snickering as I write this, but this is another crazy ruling in an increasing long line of irrational decisions by our courts. Unfurling a banner that reads "Bong Hits for Jesus" across the street from a school is free speech?!
"Public schools are instrumentalities of government, and government is not entitled to suppress speech that undermines whatever missions it defines for itself."
Maybe another reason to rethink the whole government education thing.
Of course. What do you think "free speech" means ... only speech of which you approve?
no kidding
Bong Hits for the Bonnie Blue!
"Burn a fatty not the flag"
I think there is a difference between free speech and belligerent behavior designed to cause trouble. This kid was "practicing" the latter and was rightfully disciplined in my opinion.
Where in the First Amendment is this alleged "belligerent behavior designed to cause trouble" exception located?
Umm.. It's right there between the lines. If you close your eyes and picture an emanating penumbra then you will see it.
"belligerent behavior designed to cause trouble"
Excellent definintion of the principal's reaction.
Indeed, such behavior should be punished. (see post 54)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1594630/posts?page=54#54
Dude!
"Would you rather he take the bong hits for Satan? ;)"
ROFLMAO! Naw, then there'd be posts here bitching about how the kid needs to turn to Jesus!
"Substantial effect?" "Penumbras?"
No, no, no.
I'm pretty sure Sandra D. and her choir of 'moderates' on the high court have come up with a three-prong balancing test which ensures that the government have a compelling interest for this sort of thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.