Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
‘pro-pot’ Speech By Students Not Constitutionally Protected, Supreme Court Rules
06-28-2007, 10:50 PM,
#1
‘pro-pot’ Speech By Students Not Constitutionally Protected, Supreme Court Rules
Quote:‘Pro-Pot’ Speech By Students Not Constitutionally Protected, Supreme Court Rules

Washington, DC: The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 this week that students’ speech that may be "reasonably viewed" as "promoting illegal drug use" is not protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and may be prohibited by school administrators. The ruling marks the first time the Court has determined that schools can prohibit student expression that is neither obscene nor published under the school’s auspices.

The decision reverses a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determination that found that school officials infringed upon a student’s free speech rights when they suspended him for unfurling a banner stating "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" at an off-campus student function in 2002.

"Drug abuse by the nation’s youth is a serious problem [and] …. the governmental interest in stopping student drug abuse allow[s] schools to restrict student expression that they reasonably regard as promoting such abuse," Chief Justice John Roberts opined for the Court.

Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas sided with the majority. Justice Stephen Breyer filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.

Writing for the dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens opined that the majority’s ruling could potentially "silence opponents of the war on drugs."

He wrote: "Even in high school, a rule that permits only one point of view to be expressed is less likely to produce correct answers than the open discussion of countervailing views. ... In the national debate about a serious issue, it is the expression of the minority’s viewpoint that most demands the protection of the First Amendment. Whatever the better policy may be, a full and frank discussion of the costs and benefits of the attempt to prohibit the use of marijuana is far wiser than suppression of speech because it is unpopular."

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg and David Souter joined in Justice Stephen’s dissent.

The case is Morse v. Frederick, No. 06-278.

For more information, please contact Keith Stroup, NORML Legal Counsel, at (202) 483-5500. Full text of the Supreme Court’s ruling is available online at: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/06-278.pdf. Further discussion of this case is available on the Monday, June 25 edition, of the NORML Daily Audio Stash, online at: http://www.normlaudiostash.com.

More destruction of our Constitutional rights disguised as getting rid of "Talking about illegal substances" or encouraging "illegal drug use". I know TPTB are afraid of pot and apparently even talking about it scares them to death. The best way to counter this load of bullshit is to spread education about marijuana just like we spread information about all the other conspiracies that are thrown on us. Exercise our First Amendment rights before they make it illegal to talk about pot anywhere and this will help in our struggles to wake people up. If they see they lies about this wonderful natural medicine then it open the door to show them the rest of the truth.
“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after
equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. ” -Nikola Tesla

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." -Jimi Hendrix
Reply
06-28-2007, 11:12 PM, (This post was last modified: 06-28-2007, 11:12 PM by triplesix.)
#2
‘pro-pot’ Speech By Students Not Constitutionally Protected, Supreme Court Rules
Quote:"Drug abuse by the nation’s youth is a serious problem [and] …. the governmental interest in stopping student drug abuse allow[s] schools to restrict student expression that they reasonably regard as promoting such abuse," Chief Justice John Roberts opined for the Court.
So it only takes the belief of the government that it's ideas are correct to silence speech to the contrary regardless of first amendment rights? Fucking scary precedent.

Quote:I know TPTB are afraid of pot and apparently even talking about it scares them to death.
Very true! One look at the NWO and the Illuminati show that their goal is global government. Tell me anything more global than the war on drugs specifically the global outlawing and condemnation of simple marijuana. It defies logic and is surely of some significance of which I'm not yet aware. I have heard that Cathy O'Brien claimed in the Trance-Formation of America that marijuana is not conducive to mind-control techniques and is quite good at deprogramming the brain of installed thought processes. I have to say it sounds feasible to me.

Quote:The best way to counter this load of bullshit is to spread education about marijuana just like we spread information about all the other conspiracies that are thrown on us. Exercise our First Amendment rights before they make it illegal to talk about pot anywhere and this will help in our struggles to wake people up. If they see they lies about this wonderful natural medicine then it open the door to show them the rest of the truth.
Agreed. It is widely documented that as examples of hemp get older (thousands of years), quantities of THC within them likely get smaller as well. This logically proves that mankind has been cultivating it for THC and hence helped the plant evolve to its present domesticated state. Marijuana is much like the plant equivalent of dogs. It has evolved with us as dogs have, and loves us unconditionally as dogs do. It is well-known that the companionship of a dog betters lives, brings more joy, and increases lifespan. I am wholly convinced that the same is true for Mary.
&We grow to recognize form. We grow to label that form. In doing so, do we become more intelligent? Do we become more awakened?& - Siji Tzu 四季子
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Drug czar: Calif. pot law could spark court action Valentine 5 5,134 10-22-2010, 03:05 PM
Last Post: persecuted in alberni
  Congress asks treasury for bank rules on medical marijuana = end of prohibition? h3rm35 0 1,027 05-29-2010, 03:40 AM
Last Post: h3rm35
  Many felony pot cases getting tossed out of court h3rm35 1 915 03-29-2010, 07:59 AM
Last Post: Easy Skanking
  California Supreme Court Strikes Limits for Medical Marijuana Patients h3rm35 0 726 02-02-2010, 06:02 AM
Last Post: h3rm35
  DEA Agents Accused in Court Pleadings of Dealing Heroin As Part of 1990s Pakistan Connection B4Time 0 1,172 10-21-2009, 11:07 PM
Last Post: B4Time
  Argentina rules on marijuana use mastermg 1 921 08-27-2009, 02:57 AM
Last Post: Easy Skanking
  California: San Diego Supervisors Ask US Supreme Court To Overturn State Medical Marijuana Laws Easy Skanking 1 1,222 10-24-2008, 03:20 AM
Last Post: mexika
  Vermont Supreme Court Rules Search Warrant Required for Overflight Surveillance Easy Skanking 2 1,132 04-06-2008, 12:11 AM
Last Post: Easy Skanking
  Judge rules Canada's pot possession laws unconstitutional deathstickboy 1 893 07-14-2007, 08:58 PM
Last Post: triplesix
  Head-shop Case Goes To Wyoming’s High Court pizzaman777 0 788 03-26-2007, 10:53 PM
Last Post: pizzaman777

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)