Well, fuck me crooked! Has anyone else seen this farce?
(sorry to be so USA-centric, but this is some "majorly fucked up" shit.)
Student Free-Speech Rights Defined (Free speech? What's to define?)
By MARK SHERMAN
The Associated Press
June 25, 2007
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.
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 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.'
This is a breaking news update. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
WASHINGTON (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.
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.
>>>>>>> Another poster already posted this in the newsgroup so I didn't bother, but it gets close to my feelings on the matter: They are simply setting a precedent for the future, by choosing a case that tugs heart strings. <<<<<<<
There are soooo many cases of schools deliberately trying to suppress students on IMPORTANT issues, yet they NEVER get the chance to find justice. Our society is being run into the cround, and cases like this give more power to schools, NOT LESS! When this case was filed, school lawyers went to court with the intention of making a precedent that would be used later to stop REAL issues from being allowed in schools!!!!
How in hell are our freedoms going to survive this administration?
