Bong Hits 4 Jesus--Final Episode

OpinionJournal.com ^ | June 28, 2007 | DANIEL HENNINGER

[gpapa]

The cultural disarray of the past 35 years flowed from the schools.

Maybe I should have gone to law school. But only if God promised I would grow up to be a justice on the Supreme Court. The Nine Interpreters may have more fun than anyone in public life. Tip the United States on its side and eventually everything loose rolls into the Supreme Court. Justice Antonin Scalia, a skilled ironist, by now treats the court's annual agenda like a man at a driving range with a bucket of golf balls. What fun.

[orlop9]

Here's a final quotation from Monday's "Bong" decision to pass out on street corners: "Students will test the limits of acceptable behavior in myriad ways better known to schoolteachers than to judges; school officials need a degree of flexible authority to respond to disciplinary challenges; and the law has always considered the relationship between teachers and students special. Under these circumstances, the more detailed the Court's supervision becomes, the more likely its law will engender further disputes among teachers and students. Consequently, larger numbers of those disputes will likely make their way from the schoolhouse to the courthouse. Yet no one wishes to substitute courts for school boards, or to turn the judge's chambers into the principal's office." More right-wing rant from Clarence Thomas? Nope, that's liberal Justice Stephen Breyer's concurrence.

Interesting, although I'm personally against the WOD, I can't argue against this decision.

[rhema]

Meanwhile, Justice Clarence Thomas, in a concurring opinion, took about half a line to say, "I agree," and proceeded to write one of the most compelling essays I've seen on the decline and fall of American public education. I would happily hand out Justice Thomas's opinion on street corners (though www.supremecourtus.gov relieves me of that burden).

What he's done is rummage back through school cases, mostly from 19th century state courts, to invoke the idea of a public school. His premise is that the schools' role was most certainly in loco parentis, in that they and parents broadly agreed on what made an adolescent grow into a good person; what schools need least is court interference in this hard job.

< snip >

Missouri's court in 1885 found reasonable a rule that "forbade the use of profane language." Indiana's in 1888 ruled in favor of "good deportment." An 1843 manual for schoolmasters speaks of "a core of common values" and teaching the "power of self-control, and a habit of postponing present indulgence to a greater future good."

Antique words from a world long gone? Even Justice Thomas admits "the idea of treating children as though it were the 19th century would find little support today." I'm not so sure about that. How else can one explain the flight from the public schools--into home-schooling, parochial schools, private schools and even charter schools, which invest public principals with greater control? Parents are spending thousands to have what American schools had from 1859 to 1959--some basic measure of the Three Ds: decorum, decency and diligence. Self-control as a higher "common value" than out-of-control.

Justice Thomas argues that the 1969 Tinker case dragged the schools into a morass of arcane First Amendment jurisprudence. He's right.

[vamoose]

Justice Breyer concurred in part and dissented in part. It was his view that the court rule that the principal has immunity from being sued. In essence he side steps the free speech issue. Short of overturning Tinker - Thomas’ view - Breyers approach seem better to me than that of the majority. The supreme court has replaced a murky standard with another murky standard and the flow of borderline speech cases will continue to make their way to SCOTUS. Fine tuning precedent never works. We need definitive rulings.

[Daveinyork]

It is a sad state of affairs that a case like this gets to the Supreme Court of the USA. It should have stopped at the kid’s parents, who should have said no.

[pray4liberty]

"Yet no one wishes to substitute courts for school boards, or to turn the judge's chambers into the principal's office."

Where has this guy been? That's been reality for the last 20+ years, thanks to incompetent principals and over-zealous school administrators who found an "easy way out" to slough off what they are being paid to do on The System.

Obviously this judge never heard of "zero tolerance."

[Fiji Hill]

When I first heard about this case, I thought "Bong hits" was a reference to Richard Bong, the aviator.

[tioga]

Now that is a wise remark. The parents should have said NO. Would have saved us the hassle and expense of a trial.

[Albion Wilde]

The supreme court has replaced a murky standard with another murky standard and the flow of borderline speech cases will continue to make their way to SCOTUS. Fine tuning precedent never works. We need definitive rulings.

I agree — Roberts in his confirmation hearings said he wanted to try to stop the preponderance of 5-4 rulings, but here is another one.

Thomas' concurrence is a brilliant summation, and I hope he refashions it into an article to be disseminated widely.

[Scarchin]

I teach in a public high school - a very good one.

Cases like this don't surprise me. Parents regularly defend their kids' "rights." This is especially true in the area of speech.

We had a parent this year who backed up his punk kid's assertion that our punishing him for yelling "Nigger!" was infringing on his free speech.

[jrestrepo]

Well said.

[T.Smith]

I was surprised to learn that this went to the Supreme Court, until I read these parts from the decision:

"The District Court granted petitioners summary judgment, ruling that they were entitled to qualified immunity and that they had not infringed Frederick’s speech rights. The Ninth Circuit reversed. Accepting that Frederick acted during a school-authorized activity and that the banner expressed a positive sentiment about marijuana use, the court nonetheless found a First Amendment violation because the school punished Frederick without demonstrating that his speech threatened substantial disruption. It also concluded that Morse was not entitled to qualified immunity because Frederick’s right to display the banner was so clearly established that a reasonable principal in Morse’s position would have understood that her actions were unconstitutional."

Those wacky guys at the 9th circuit!

[pray4liberty]

I believe in free speech, and I have zero tolerance for "zero tolerance" as pertains to discipline--but in this case the school was right on this one, God help me.

It was what I call a push-your-buttons case, with the word Bong and the name Jesus in it, it was geared to do just that.

I wonder who put the kids up to it. May it be a good lesson that freedom of speech also carries a measure of responsibility.

[bvw]

My understanding is that in his school, the Principal is King — his actions in his proper authority as Principal are, except in most extreme of circumstances, presumed to be unreviewable.

It is like the Captain of a Ship, or a Jury in its Hearing Room, or a Judge in his Courtroom, or a military Commander in the field — or like a Parent with minor children.

In that view, the question is did the Principal’s authority extend to the public sidewalk across the street from the school event? Yes, by strong association — the timing, the nearness of protesting student, and by the fact that the protestor was a student at the school. All these would lead a reasonable person to presume that the student was part of the school assembly. Therefore the good Principal HAD to act, to assure order and decorum in among HIS charges.

I disagree with the “modern” legal concept that free speech must be allowed in public schools — this fool’s principle mocks and undermines the authority of the Principal.

There are local remedies for bad Principals. They are called school boards.

[bvw]

Thanks to Powerline's An Odd Case Makes Good Law for provoking and motivating my response above, and thanks to Jim Robinson and all fellow Freepers for providing a "free speech" zone -- a true Liberty Post, here.

[pray4liberty]

There are local remedies for bad Principals. They are called school boards.

In theory, school boards can take action. In reality, they often don't.