Assignment task:
Morse v. Frederick (2007) v. Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
At a school-supervised event, Joseph Frederick held up a banner with the message "Bong Hits 4 Jesus," a slang reference to marijuana smoking. Principal Deborah Morse took away the banner and suspended Frederick for ten days. She justified her actions by citing the school's policy against the display of material that promotes the use of illegal drugs. Frederick sued under 42 U.S.C. 1983. the federal civil rights statute, alleging a violation of his First Amendment right to freedom of speech. The District Court found no constitutional violation and ruled in favor of Morse. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed. Claiming the First Amendment protection was extended to students' speech except where the speech would cause a disturbance. Because Frederick was punished for his message rather than for any disturbance, the Circuit Court ruled, the punishment was unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit by a 5-4 vote, ruling that school officials can prohibit students from displaying messages that promote illegal drug use. Chief Justice John Roberts's majority opinion held that although students do have some right to political speech even while in school, this right does not extend to pro-drug messages that may undermine the school's important mission to discourage drug use. The majority held that Frederick's message, though "cryptic," was reasonably interpreted as promoting marijuana use - equivalent to
"[Take] bong hits" or "bong hits (are a good thing]." In ruling for Morse, the Court affirmed that the speech rights of public school students are
Not as extensive as those adults normally enjoy
A. Identify the constitutional clause that is common to both Morse v. Frederick (2007) and Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
B. Based on the constitutional clause identified in part A, explain why the facts of Morse v. Frederick (2007) led to a different holding than the holding in Tinker v. Des Moines (1969).
C. Describe an action that members of the community could take if they disagree with the holding in Morse v. Frederick (2007) to limit its impact.