ABSTRACT
In the “Bong hits for Jesus” case (Morse v. Frederick, 2007), the United States Supreme Court wrestled with the question of whether its traditional, albeit muted, support for the free speech rights of students in public schools should be curtailed if the student “speech” could be interpreted as promoting the use of illegal drugs. The Court’s split decision in the case illustrates different views about the purposes of public schools in a democratic society. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts said that when a school principal suspended a high school student for unfurling a banner proclaiming “Bong hits for Jesus,” she was acting within the bounds of the Constitution because the speech could be interpreted as advocating illegal drug use. Justices Alito and Kennedy, while agreeing with Roberts, were careful to draw limits on a public school’s ability to restrict the right of students to speak on public issues. Conversely, Justice Thomas wrote that the very idea of students possessing First Amendment speech rights in school was spurious: “In light of the history of American public education, it cannot seriously be suggested that the First Amendment ‘freedom of speech’ encompasses a student’s right to speak in public schools. Early public schools gave total control to teachers, who expected obedience and respect from students” (Thomas, J., concurring, p. 10). Notably, even on a Supreme Court that is considered quite conservative, Justice Thomas was unable to garner any support for his position.
