May 7, 2009 1:34 PM

Student Loses "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" Case

(CBS/AP)  The Supreme Court tightened limits on student speech Monday, ruling against a high school student and his 14-foot-long "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner.

Schools may prohibit student expression that can be interpreted as advocating drug use, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court in a 5-4 ruling.

Joseph Frederick unfurled his homemade sign on a winter morning in 2002, as the Olympic torch made its way through Juneau, Alaska, en route to the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

Frederick said the banner was a nonsensical message that he first saw on a snowboard. He intended the banner to proclaim his right to say anything at all.

His principal, Deborah Morse, said the phrase was a pro-drug message that had no place at a school-sanctioned event. Frederick denied that he was advocating for drug use.

"The message on Frederick's banner is cryptic," Roberts said. "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."

CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen said he was not surprised by the ruling, saying that, "high school students typically have been blocked from having the same first amendment rights as adults and this ruling falls into a long line of cases that say so. The lesson here is if you want to exercise your full free expression rights get as far away from your high school as you can."

Morse suspended the student, prompting a federal civil rights lawsuit.

Students in public schools don't have the same rights as adults, but neither do they leave their constitutional protections at the schoolhouse gate, as the court said in a landmark speech-rights ruling from Vietnam era.

The court has limited what students can do in subsequent cases, saying they may not be disruptive or lewd or interfere with a school's basic educational mission.

Frederick, now 23, said he later had to drop out of college after his father lost his job. The elder Frederick, who worked for the company that insures the Juneau schools, was fired in connection with his son's legal fight, the son said. A jury recently awarded Frank Frederick $200,000 in a lawsuit he filed over his firing.

Joseph Frederick pleaded guilty in 2004 to a misdemeanor charge of selling marijuana at Stephen F. Austin State University in Nacogdoches, Texas, according to court records.

Also on Monday, the court loosened restrictions on corporate- and union funded television ads that air close to elections, weakening a key provision of a landmark campaign finance law.

The court, split 5-4, in upholding an appeals court ruling that an anti-abortion group should have been allowed to air ads during the final two months before the 2004 elections.

"This is a defeat for the McCain-Feingold legislation," Cohen said, adding that the ruling is "a return to the old ways, when there were fewer restrictions on the way people spend money when it comes to campaigns."

The Supreme Court's swing vote, Anthony Kennedy, has swung mostly conservative, reports CBS News correspondent Wyatt Andrews. Overall, the court under Chief Justice John Roberts has been pro-business, anti-lawsuit and anti-abortion.

Other cases the Supreme Court decided Monday:

  • The Supreme Court ruled taxpayers cannot challenge a White House initiative that helps religious charities get a share of federal money. The 5-4 decision blocks a lawsuit by a group of atheists and agnostics against eight Bush administration officials including the head of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.

    "This is another case where this court has chipped away at the wall separating church and state, blocking a lawsuit that challenges a government initiative that helps religion. This is part of a larger trend that tweaks the Establishment Clause in a way to promote religion," Cohen said.

  • The Supreme Court sided with developers and the Bush administration Monday in a dispute with environmentalists over protecting endangered species. The court ruled 5-4 for home builders and the Environmental Protection Agency in a case that involved the intersection of two environmental laws, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act.
  • © 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
    Add a Comment See all 171 Comments
    by randalds June 26, 2007 4:47 PM EDT
    As soon as someone makes a point of telling me they're a believer in some sort of religion, my opinion of them immediately drops. I have no use for them.

    Posted by fuziwuzi at 11:37 AM : Jun 26, 2007

    I don't have a problem with someone who believes in or follows a religion, as long as they don't preach it to me and as long as they keep it out of the public schools by trying to force others to accept it and their fantasies, like prayer or creationism. These things belong in their church where they can practice their beliefs in them all they want, as long as they don't try to force them on others. They do not have that right. My grandfather, for instance, was a devout Catholic (I know to people like ricky that makes him a follower of the antichrist pope...yeah...right), but he strongly believed in keeping the church and state separate, including no school prayer and teaching only real science. He didn't think it somehow suppressed his faith, but rather that the wall between church and state kept the state out of his free practice of his faith. Just like it's meant to do. Of course a born-again'er once told me that my grandfather is now in hell because he wasn't baptized by full immersion in water. Funny that a god would give more of a sh*it about a bath instead of the sum of a man's life, isn't it?
    Reply to this comment
    by randalds June 26, 2007 4:39 PM EDT
    Once again you've mistakingly referred to non-believers of your Fantasy Land delusions as "Haters of Christians". We don't hate you and your ilk, Ricky; we PITY your feeble mindedness,

    Posted by veteran71 at 08:50 AM : Jun 26, 2007

    Might have to disagree with you on one tiny point bro. While I don't hate many christians (and certainly not all as this clown swingingdick claims that I do.....nice of him to always try to put words in my mouth isn't it?) I do hate him. Most Christians are fine and decent folk and I have no problem with them because they leave me alone. It's the born-again'er's that are the ones I hate. the ones who believe they're on some sort of god given mission to spread the word, no matter how smug, self-righteous and obnoxious they have to be about it and they sure are all three. They drive many people away from any idea of faith with their preachy, judgemental ways and I have no doubt that they have never had any true long lasting converts of any but the most weak-minded. Most real christians that I know are embarrassed by them, though that fact alone would cause an as*shole like ricky to claim that they're not "real" Christians in his narrow-minded world.

    Guess what ricky, they way you act here would make anyone wonder WHY would they want to be part of anything that would allow and obnoxious preachy judge like you be a member? If your mission is to convert, then your methods are a horrible failure.
    Reply to this comment
    by Ed0719 June 26, 2007 2:37 PM EDT
    Why should I show any respect to the beliefs of religious people? They don't show any respect to my beliefs, so what they sow, they reap.

    As soon as someone makes a point of telling me they're a believer in some sort of religion, my opinion of them immediately drops. I have no use for them.
    Reply to this comment
    by honest_news June 26, 2007 12:33 PM EDT
    When I was in high school in the early 70s, I wrote/drew a comic strip for the official school paper that dealt with the issues of the day, one of which was drugs. Although all of the characters in the strip were fictional, the adult characters were clearly based on teachers at the school. In one of the strips, an adult character gives a student a jay to smoke, and in another strip a "teacher" is smuggling dope into the country.

    The strip raised eyebrows, but at no time was there ever any serious discussion of it being censored, nor any disciplinary action taken against me or the editor of the paper. Perhaps this was because the strip didn't condone the use of drugs... but in the current environment I can't imagine a student artist in high school not being threatened with disciplinary action if he/she portrayed a student smoking pot or one of the teachers dealing in drugs.

    It's a sad commentary on our times and the disintegration of First Amendment freedoms by the Bush Court.
    Reply to this comment
    by carlylaine June 26, 2007 8:55 AM EDT
    Isn't it cute the way the LIBERALs have no qualms about putting a Christian down? Looks like you guys can't play nice with people you don't like-but the rest who are not "POLITICALLY CORRECT" must. If a Christian were to say anything about Muslims or any group of people they'd be called racistsbigots. You can be PREJUDICED against Christians and rail against them til the saliva hangs off your chin, you gnash your teeth, roll your eyes with abject hatred, your ugly hatred-filled faces gnarl up with disgust and putrefied vile, but it's ok for you.

    What makes me laugh at you sneering menaces is that you LIBs hate what Christians are so much you would kill them. Your venom speaks volumes.
    Reply to this comment
    by jsilver2th June 26, 2007 6:20 AM EDT
    So what I want to know is does Jesus have his green card or is he an illegal alien? If Jose and Julio get to light up so should Jesus.

    This guy should have said VOTE FOR BONG HITS FOR JESUS paid for by really greedy self-centered one-issue political sleazbags and the Court would have found Free Speech rights.

    Like I was wondering if you made your kids name BONG HITS FOR JESUS could you keep them out of having to go to these fascist schools? Then at roll call the teacher would be very bad. Personally I would like to make some names illegal that a really offensive like my cousins for example.

    Reply to this comment
    by canyoutellme-2009 June 26, 2007 6:10 AM EDT
    Whatever it is that is the most important thing in your life, that is what you worship, whether it be subconsciously or consciously. Jesus Christ is the most important part of my life, so I worship Him.


    Posted by singinrick at 01:53 AM : Jun 26, 2007

    Shame on you.. Saying Christ is the most important part of your life... shame on all Christians who say that.. the most important part of your lives are your FAMILY.. PERIOD. Those who forsake their familes for their God are shameful. Without your family, you are nothing... Zilch ... Zip... Religion is a disease... something created to control the masses. Rick, how does it feel to be a subject of control? If you want to believe in God, feel free, that's your choice... but to put Him first before your family is ridiculous.
    Reply to this comment
    by randalds June 26, 2007 5:17 AM EDT
    "Inherit the Wind" (one of the single greatest movies ever made!)(the original with Spencer Tracy and Fredric March that is)

    Should be required viewing in every public school and no child should be allowed to graduate High School without a detailed understanding of why it (and evolution are right and scientifically correct) and a literal interpretation of the bible is complete and utter nonsense.

    Oh and ricky, evolution has be scientifically proven more times then you can count, but it's you who close your eyes to that truth and continue to believe in a fairy tale that has no one shred of evidence to back it up. Real science is the path to the future and superstitions belong in the dustbin of history.

    Ta ta for now and go in Darwin to love and serve evolution. Amne. lol!
    Reply to this comment
    by randalds June 26, 2007 5:08 AM EDT
    -You hate anyone who stands up against you Randy. That's what you hate.

    Posted by singinrick at 01:59 AM : Jun 26, 2007


    ROTFLMFAO!!!! You never have!!!

    LOL! LOL! LOL!

    Oh man! I needed THAT laugh. Now for some good ice cream and throw "Inherit the Wind" (one of the single greatest movies ever made!)(the original with Spencer Tracy and Fredric March that is) on the DVD and relax! I love the part where Tracy (as a thinly veiled Clarence Darrow) makes March (as that religious lunatic William Jennings Bryan) look like a monkey on the witness stand during the Scopes trial! Fantastic!

    Good night ricky and watch out for the Muslim terrorists in your closet.
    Reply to this comment
    by brianbwb-2009 June 26, 2007 5:06 AM EDT
    "Bong hits 4 Jesus" might very well be offensive to some hypocrites, I don't find it offensive at all, but the main question is since when does the Supreme Court abridge the right to speech it considers offensive illegal?

    I personally find the KKK, Aryan Nations, Pat Robertson, Graham, Falwell, singingrick, and the lot of such religious fascists offensive, but I don't posit the Court muzzle them. The constitution prohibits this, but since there are Bushies on the Court, maybe its just a "piece of God damned paper" to them also.

    Besides, a few bong hits probably helped open his eyes to the corruption he addressed. The Court could also use a few. I find humor in a person, whose divinity is a matter of belief, prescribed an herb whose evil nature is also a matter of belief, neither provable.
    Reply to this comment
    See all 171 Comments
    .
    Scroll Left
    Scroll Right More »
    CBS News on Facebook