(no subject)

[novapsyche]

Supreme Court hears 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus' case

[Joseph] Frederick chose to display the banner during a school-sanctioned event to watch the Olympic torch relay as it passed through Juneau on its way to the 2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City.

[His principal] saw the banner, confronted Frederick and suspended him. Frederick said she doubled the suspension to 10 days when he quoted Thomas Jefferson on free speech.

Comments

[simianpower.livejournal.com]

I heard about that. It sounds almost too silly to have made it to the Supreme Court. I mean, Supreme! Seriously.

[voiceandsalt.livejournal.com]

according to summaries of the oral arguments that were heard today, the court was pretty confused about what exactly Frederick meant by the banner. i think it's sad that what he meant matters so much. it seems to me that speech shouldn't have to have a particular political point to be free -- surrealist speech and poetry should also be protected by the 1st amendment. but the real issue in this case is whether he should be able to get cash from the principal herself for the violation of his 1st amendment rights, and i tend to think the issue is muddled enough that it's unfair to say the principal should have known that the banner was protected under the 1st amendment.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

The student obviously made his perspective clear when he quoted Jefferson. The fact that the woman doubled his suspension makes me think that she should have known that she was, at the least, being a dick. And she should have known that this was going to come back to bite her.

I have no doubt that this is a 1st Amendment issue. The boy was not in school at the time and not on school property. In short, he was not a student but merely any citizen expressing himself with a banner. To restrict his speech would be to say that he has no claim on freedom of expression until he is out of school. It would be to relegate all students to second-class citizenry.