On The Front Lines
Rutherford Institute Defends First Amendment Free Speech Right of Student Punished for Displaying 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus' Banner at City Rally
WASHINGTON, DC--Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute have filed a "friend of the court" brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in Morse v. Frederick in defense of the First Amendment rights of a high school student who was punished for displaying what school officials deemed "offensive" material at a non-school-related rally. The Institute's brief calls on the Supreme Court to affirm an appeals court ruling that school officials violated the First Amendment when they suspended Joseph Frederick for holding up a banner reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" at an Olympic Torch Relay procession.
A copy of the brief here.
"Just as students do not forfeit their First Amendment rights upon entering the schoolhouse gate, so too, schools cannot censor student speech uttered in quintessential public forums, even when that speech might be considered offensive," said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "Rather than punishing Joseph Frederick for his 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus' banner, school officials would have done better to educate students on the importance and history of the First Amendment, along with the dangers and perils of drug use."
In January 2002, officials at Juneau-Douglas High School allowed students to leave school in order to attend the Winter Olympics Torch Relay, which was sponsored by private businesses. Before going to school, senior high school student Joseph Frederick attended the rally to watch the Olympic torch as it was carried through the streets of Juneau, Alaska, on its way to Salt Lake City. While at the rally, Frederick stood on a public sidewalk and held up the banner "Bong Hits 4 Jesus."
Despite the fact that the rally was not sponsored by the school and Frederick was not on school grounds, school officials suspended Frederick for 10 days because the banner's message was contrary to the school district's anti-drug educational mission. Although a federal trial court ruled in favor of the school district and its principal, Deborah Morse, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the ruling, holding that the school's suspension violated Frederick's First Amendment rights.
In filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, Institute attorneys asked the Justices to uphold the Ninth Circuit's ruling and reject the idea that schools may punish students for expression that is perceived to be offensive, no matter where it occurs. In citing a 1993 ruling by Judge Frank Easterbrook, Institute attorneys noted, "When challenging or offensive ideas are raised in schools under the umbrella of free speech, '[t]he school's proper response is to educate the audience rather than squelch the speaker.'"
Furthermore, as Institute attorneys concluded, "The public schools cannot be expected to cure all of America's social ills. There is, and there must remain, a line over which school administrators cannot transgress into the views and daily lives of students and parents. That line is the schoolhouse gate, or where students cease to act as formal representatives of the school system. Absent the direct and substantial disruption of the normal function of the school, the discipline of students away from school is the job of parents and law enforcement officers, not school officials."
