Supreme Court- Advocates for Free Speech If you're a Lobbyist-NOT if you're a kid in school Somervell County Salon-Glen Rose, Rainbow, Nemo, Glass....Texas


 

Supreme Court- Advocates for Free Speech If you're a Lobbyist-NOT if you're a kid in school
 


25 June 2007 at 2:32:08 PM
salon

You know, I'd feel a whole lot more like getting with the SCOTU program for free speech if they weren't inconsistent. First up, get ready for a whole lot more SPAM on our Vast Teevee Wasteland as the election date gets closer. I actually don't disagree with this ruling, which says that not letting groups flood the airwaves with stuff is censorship; it's just that I hate that crap on television and I refuse to be assaulted by it this time, as in the last presidential election- the DVR that pre-records and lets me skip commercials awaits. Here's what Chief Justice John Roberts said.

The decision overturned a legal ban promoted in 2002 by Senator John McCain that prevented an anti-abortion group from broadcasting advertisements in Wisconsin in the two months before the 2004 general election.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said the ban infringed the constitution's First Amendment right to free speech.

"When it comes to defining what speech qualifies as the functional equivalent of express advocacy subject to such a ban... we give the benefit of the doubt to speech, not censorship," he wrote.

Unless you're a kid wearing a "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" t-shirt.

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.

Now, I'm not advocating drug use, but I'm mostly with the conservative groups who you KNOW weren't advocating bong hits, in that who decides what speech is appropriate if speech is really free? And we can't forget that students aren't supposed to be ditching their constitutional rights once they walk into a building?

Conservative groups that often are allied with the administration are backing Frederick out of concern that a ruling for Morse would let schools clamp down on religious expression, including speech that might oppose homosexuality or abortion.

A comment from Balkinization about this case.

In Morse v. Frederick, Thomas wanted to ditch another Warren Court precedent, Tinker, based on his reading of how states interpreted the First Amendment before it even applied to them. Roberts' opinion creates a new rule allowing schools to ban student advocacy of illegal drug use-- but this rule would apparently not extend to student advocacy of changing the drug laws. (Which raises the obvious question: How can we tell whether "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" is advocacy of illegality, political advocacy of drug liberalization, or just a joke?) Alito and Kennedy, who think of themselves as first amendment libertarians, tried to limit Roberts' opinion by arguing that students still had the right to make political and social statements, just not make statements that might threaten the physical safety of other students, and advocacy of illegal drug use threatened students' physical safety. (Of course the question of what sort of speech might threaten physical safety could easily swallow up the rule. For example, to use the facts of a recent 9th circuit case, what about a student who wears a t-shirt on "tolerance day" that says that homosexuality is against God's law? Would school officials be able to make the student remove the t-shirt on the ground that it might lead to fisticuffs? If so, then Alito and Kennedy's theory is not very speech protective at all.)

I predict more lawsuits along the way. But in any event, the sheer hypocrisy of the SCOTU shows itself... again.


Permalink
     Views: 741 
Latest Blog Post by salon -Video- Somervell County Commissioners Court Special Sessions (2) Dec 23 2019

 You! Leave a Comment! You Know you Want To!
You must be a registered member to comment on the blog.
Your first post is held pending approval to make sure you're not a spammer bot

 Not registered? Or you can login!

LOGON - Name:Password:

New poster comments are moderated, meaning they won't show up until approved... or not.  Be patient-we have lives outside this blog, so it might take awhile You want to be rude? totally stupid? inappropriate? Racist? Bigoted? Flame war baiter? Your post may be deleted. Spammers or people posting pretend interest comments but really wanting to hawk their latest book or sell stuff or govt propaganda flacks won't see their posts published. Comments do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the site owner(salon).
If you have a problem with logging in or registering, please speak up right away. Love your comments. Oh, except spammers
More on commenting



     

Click Here for Main Page



Guest
Today Is  
Friday, January 17, 2020

Latest Posts


Paul Harper offered to settle State of Texas ex rel. Best v Harper lawsuit for $68k back in 2016
pharper 12/29/2019 Views 503



Video- Somervell County Commissioners Court Special Sessions (2) Dec 23 2019

salon 12/23/2019 Views 539



Top 100 Posts on Somervell County Salon for 2019

salon 12/22/2019 Views 356



Plans for Somervell County Salon Blog for 2020
salon 12/22/2019 Views 276



Imagine you were called up for jury duty and some people said they'd already made up their mind
salon 12/22/2019 Views 288



National Review on Removing Trump from Office (12/2019)
salon 12/22/2019 Views 280


More Blog Headlines








 



Comments

salon > Quick update on this, via Pacer-Click on pic to see larger (Turk Case Update- Telephone Conference Hearing Set for March 8 2019 )

salon > Lance Been awhile. Send me an email at salon@glenrose.net with the names of who you're talking about, above. Also, the newspaper editor is no longer local, ie officed here, but the paper is run.... (What Happened to Jerry Jacene? )

LanceHall > I'd love to see the Hotel Guest books and see if Jacene's name shows up long before he officially *found* the tracks.  I'd like to know if the Visitor's Bureau has emails wit.... (What Happened to Jerry Jacene? )

LanceHall > I see the land or that part of it is now in the hands of Glen Rose's own Corky Underwood. Is Jacene still involved?   I had already informed the Visitor Bureau manager (who's.... (What Happened to Jerry Jacene? )





Home | Blog Home | About | News | Piazza | Calendar | Audio/Video/Open Rec | Search
Write!  |profile | quotes |
top Daily | top Weekly |top Month | top Year | Top All! | archives | subscribe RSS