Alaska: 'Bong Hits' To Supreme Court?

[c-ray]

May 03, 2006
By Eric Morrison, Juneau Empire
http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/050306/loc_20060503009.shtml

Alaska -- The Juneau School Board is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a court ruling that supported a former student's right to display a banner that read "Bong Hits 4 Jesus."

The Juneau School District has enlisted some big-name help in hopes of overturning the ruling that could potentially cost it money. Los Angeles attorney Kenneth Starr, who served as the independent counsel investigating former president Bill Clinton, has agreed to represent the School Board and former Juneau-Douglas High School Principal Deb Morse on a pro bono basis to appeal an April decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The San Francisco-based court reversed a lower federal court decision when it ruled Morse and the School Board violated JDHS student Joseph Frederick's First Amendment rights in January 2002.

"The 9th Circuit's decision has left the Board and school administrators with no guidance as to where and when we can enforce our policy against messages promoting illegal drug use," said Phyllis Carlson, president of the School Board. "Federal law requires us to maintain a consistent message that use of drugs like marijuana is harmful and illegal. Yet, when we try to enforce our policies, our administrators are sued and exposed to damage awards."

Frederick was suspended after he was observed with a sign that read "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" during the visit of the 2002 Winter Olympic Torch to Juneau. Frederick was off school grounds but it was during school hours.

"How foolish," said Juneau-based lawyer Douglas Mertz, who has been representing Frederick. "How much money are they going to waste trying to deprive someone of their Constitutional rights?"

Mertz, who has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court before, said it is very unlikely the nation's highest court will hear the case.

"Number one, they take very few cases anyway," he said. "And the cases they usually take are issues where there is some issue of national importance and significant disagreement between lower courts, and this case fits neither category."

Carlson said Starr, whose investigation led to the impeachment of President Clinton by the U.S. House of Representatives, has the reputation and qualifications to take the case.

"He is absolutely the best attorney we could have for this case," she said. "The fact that he is willing to waive his fee confirms our belief in the importance of this case to school districts throughout the country."

Mertz said he is not intimidated by Starr's star-power.

"In the Supreme Court, it's the merit of the cases that count," he said.

Note: School Board secures former Clinton investigator Kenneth Starr as pro bono attorney in attempt to reverse ruling in First Amendment banner case.

[c-ray]

from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6238672.stm

Monday, 25 June 2007
US student loses free speech case

The ruling tightens limits on US students' free speech rights

A former high school student has lost his case in what is the US Supreme Court's first major ruling on students' free speech rights in almost 20 years.

At issue was whether a school principal violated a student's right to free speech by suspending him for displaying a banner reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus".

Joseph Frederick unfurled the banner near to his school as the Olympic flame passed through Juneau, Alaska, in 2002.

The Supreme Court justices ruled by 5-4 that his rights were not violated.

Chief Justice John Roberts said in a written ruling that schools may prohibit student expression that can be interpreted as advocating the use of drugs.

Mr Frederick, 18 at the time, said the words on his 14ft (4.26m) banner did not relate to drug use and were meant to be funny in an attempt to get on television.

Head teacher Deborah Morse, who destroyed Mr Frederick's banner and suspended him for 10 days, argued that the banner's message went against the school's anti-drugs policy and was unfurled during a school event to watch the flame pass.

A bong is a type of water pipe that can be used to smoke marijuana.

Bush's backing

The Supreme Court's ruling has tightened limits on students' rights to free speech at school events.

Chief Justice Roberts wrote: "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."

The court found that schools "may take steps to safeguard those entrusted to their care from speech that can reasonably be regarded as encouraging illegal drug use".

This meant Mr Frederick's constitutional free speech rights were not violated by the confiscation of his banner and his suspension, Chief Justice Roberts concluded.

Justice John Paul Stevens was among the four justices who dissented on the ruling.

He wrote: "Although this case began with a silly nonsensical banner, it ends with the court inventing out of whole cloth a special First Amendment rule permitting the censorship of any student speech that mentions drugs."

Ms Morse and the Juneau school board were supported by the Bush administration, which wanted a broad rule that public schools do not have to tolerate speech that disrupts their basic educational mission.

Vietnam precedent

Mr Frederick, now 23 and studying and teaching in China, was backed in the case by the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Center for Law and Justice.

He was also supported by conservative groups concerned that a ruling against him could allow schools to limit students' expression of religious views, particularly on the issues of abortion and homosexuality.

Mr Frederick's lawyer, Douglas Mertz, argued that the court should stand by its 1969 ruling that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate".

In that case, at the height of the Vietnam War, the Supreme Court decided in favour of students who wanted to wear black armbands in class to protest against the war.

But the court ruled in the late 1980s that a student did not have the right to give a sexually-suggestive speech at a school assembly and that school newspapers could be censored.