Supreme Court Deals Blow to Student's Rights to Free Speech

A. Kairi
According to an article from the Associated Press, the Supreme Court dealt a blow to student's right to free speech on Monday. The high court ruled against a former high school student named Joseph Frederick. Frederick, now 23, had been suspended for holding a banner that had the words "Bong Hits for Jesus" printed on it, when the Olympic torch passed by his high school on its way to the winter Olympics.

The school was not technically in session at the time of the incident; it was closed so students could assemble outside on the sidewalk in front of the school to watch the torch bearing. It was a school sanctioned event.

Frederick reportedly made the 14 ft. banner himself with the intention of showing that he was free to say anything that he chose. Frederick maintained that the phrase was not meant to convey anything, but was rather a silly slogan he once saw on a snowboard.

Frederick explanation did not jive with the school principal, Deborah Morse. Morse maintained that the banner was a "pro-drug message" and soon suspended Frederick from the school, according to the Associated Press.

Frederick then brought a federal civil rights lawsuit as a result of his suspension from the school.

According to the Associated Press, John Roberts Chief Justice of the Supreme Court opined: "The message on Frederick's banner is cryptic. But Principal Morse thought the banner would be interpreted by those viewing it as promoting illegal drug use, and that interpretation is plainly a reasonable one." Roberts went on to state that schools can ban speech the promotes drug use.

Student's rights to free speech made the national spotlight in 1969 in the case of Tinker vs. Des Moines School District. In that case justices opined: "First Amendment rights, applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teachers and students. It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years."

A series of court rulings in the years subsequent to the landmark ruling slowly added limits to students free speech rights in regard to disruptive or lewd behavior that "interfere with a school's basic educational mission," according to the Associated Press.

Fredrick now lives and works as a teacher in China. He maintains that he has been adversely affected by the case. Fredrick claims that his father, Frank Fredrick was fired because of the case; he used to work at a company that provided insurance to the school. Frank Fredrick was recently awarded $200,000 by a jury over his firing.

Court records show that the Joseph Fredrick plead guilty to selling marijuana while attending college in Texas in 2004.

The case of a student holding a banner reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" seems an unlikely one to draw support from conservative groups, but many joined Frederick battle out of worry that any precedent set could lead to schools prohibiting religious expression, including opposition to abortion and homosexuality.

Sources:
The Associated Press. Court limits student free-speech rights, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070625/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_bong_hits

Student Rights

Published by A. Kairi

A. Kairi is a natural beauty care and crafting enthusiast that has operated a natural beauty care products business since 2004. She has held dozens of natural beauty care workshops in private venues and at M...  View profile

4 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Me12/3/2008

    Even harder to imagine that the SCOTUS agreed to take the case. Geesh.

  • Alyce Rocco6/26/2007

    What if he had been holding up a banner showing a lewd sex act committed on a child that said "Children for Jesus". Perhaps students do need to learn about proper and improper use of freedom of expression. Smoke Crack for Jesus? My 12 year old nephew was approached by a classmate during school hours to try cocaine.

  • Mike Giordano6/26/2007

    Talk about frivolous. These new justices are acting like grade schoolers. Here we go again.

  • Carol Gilbert6/25/2007

    Hard to believe someone took this case to the Supreme Court.

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.