‘Bong Hits’ case going back to court – Juneau Empire
The “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” case is headed back to court.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments in the case in September, local attorney Doug Mertz said Wednesday.

Mertz represents Joseph Frederick, the former Juneau-Douglas High School student who displayed the “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” banner that sparked a free speech debate that has been going on for six years and has been heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Mertz said the Supreme Court ruling had not addressed all the issues involved in the case, particularly whether Alaska’s free speech provisions protected Frederick’s actions and whether the banner constituted a legitimate political or social protest rather than a pro-drug declaration.

Frederick pressed his case in district court, but was turned down. The appeal is in reaction to that decision.

“Frederick’s banner had nothing to do with drugs, the principal’s seizure of it was unreasonable, and … the banner was well within the protections of the Alaska Constitution,” Mertz said in a statement.

Mertz said he was notified directly that the same panel of three judges that had previously sided with his client agreed to hear the case.

The case started in 2002, when then-Juneau-Douglas High School Principal Deborah Morse took down Frederick’s banner at a school-sponsored, off-campus event, and suspended him from school.

Frederick sued, saying his right to free speech had been violated. The case eventually went to the Supreme Court, which sided with Morse and the school district in 2007.

The Supreme Court had ruled in favor of the principal on the narrow interpretation that “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” was a passage intended to celebrate drug use and therefore the school, in its mission to prevent student drug use, is justified in tearing down the banner.  Pete Guither at the DrugWarRant cited this review from the SCOTUSblog:

The Chief Justice’s opinion, too, indicates that the case would have come out differently if the banner had “convey[ed] any sort of political or religious message,” such as that involved in “political debate over the criminalization of drug use or possession,” rather than (in the Court’s view) mere “student speech celebrating illegal drug use.” Debate, political and religious messages — protected. “Celebration” of illegal activity (drug use, anyway) — no go. That’s the upshot.

If only the sign had said “It is politically wrong to make Bong Hits (which we would never endorse) illegal 4 Jesus, who I believe is the Son of God and commanded by Him to partake of the cannabis sacrament”, then he would have passed under the Roberts court.  It might have been hard to read and even harder to write with duct tape, but at least it wouldn’t have been illegal student speech celebrating drug use.

Related posts

• Will you enlist in the war to end adult marijuana prohibition? (15)
• WA high court says random school drug testing unconstitutional (2)
• The Top Five States with Most Marijuana Use (7)