bornliberal

The Liberals lost this case to the conservative Supreme Court. It is important to recognize how important your vote is to this process and who selects judges to the courts. Personally, I would like to see term limits on justices and penaltys for not participating in decisions we tax payers are paying for. But that is aside to the issue here. More at both references below.

Justices to Hear Landmark Free-Speech Case
Defiant Message Spurs Most Significant Student 1st Amendment Test in Decades

By Robert Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 13, 2007; Page A03

The most important student free-speech conflict to reach the Supreme Court since the height of the Vietnam War hinges on a somewhat absurd, vaguely offensive, mostly nonsensical message of protest.

Joseph Frederick sued after his principal took away his banner.


That is the slogan that a defiant high school student named Joseph Frederick fashioned with a 14-foot piece of paper and a $3 roll of duct tape. His goal was partly to get on TV as the Olympic torch passed through his town of Juneau, Alaska, and mostly to get under the skin of his disciplinarian principal, Deborah Morse, with whom he had a running feud.

It worked, at least the irritating-the-principal part. Morse crossed Glacier Avenue to Frederick's position across from the school and confiscated the banner. She later suspended him for 10 days. Frederick, a high school rebel who at the time was fond of quoting Thoreau and Voltaire, said Morse tacked on the last five days when he paraphrased Thomas Jefferson's admonition that "speech limited is speech lost."

In the five years since, a classic conflict between a second-semester senior impatient to move on in the world and his frazzled principal trying to maintain order has become an only-in-America battle spawning numerous lawsuits, conflicting court rulings and changes that shook the lives of its participants.

Now, a wide range of interested parties has assembled for what they see as an epic Supreme Court battle, which will be heard on Monday.

The American Civil Liberties Union has been on Frederick's side from the jump, joined by a diverse liberal and conservative coalition of civil rights, constitutional law and religious organizations. Kenneth W. Starr, the independent counsel during the investigation of President Bill Clinton, has volunteered his time to the Juneau School District, and school boards nationwide, plus the Bush administration, are supporting Morse and the school district.

Morse v. Frederick asks the justices to weigh the court's famous 1969 ruling that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate" against more recent decisions acknowledging a school system's ability to create rules that maintain order and protect students from messages deemed harmful.

In this case, the school board maintains that Frederick's slogan encouraged smoking marijuana. But other school districts, especially in light of school shootings and other violence, have restricted clothing and speech that they thought could cause disruption or violence.

Both sides equate an adverse ruling with cataclysmic results.

The "extraordinarily broad claim" asserted by the government, said ACLU national legal director Steven R. Shapiro, "would in effect overrule the entire architecture of student speech law that the Supreme Court has so carefully constructed over the past 40 years."

Morse's brief, written by Starr and a team of pro bono lawyers at the firm of Kirkland and Ellis, said ratification of Frederick's victory in the appellate court would make all the more daunting "the vital task of teachers, administrators and volunteer school board members in attending holistically to the needs of millions of students entrusted every school day to their charge."

MORE
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01699.html

Held: Because schools may take steps to safeguard those entrusted to their care from speech that can reasonably be regarded as encourag-ing illegal drug use, the school officials in this case did not violate the First Amendment by confiscating the pro-drug banner and suspend-ing Frederick. Pp. 5–15.
(a)
Frederick’s argument that this is not a school speech case is re-jected. The event in question occurred during normal school hoursand was sanctioned by Morse as an approved social event at which the district’s student-conduct rules expressly applied. Teachers and administrators were among the students and were charged with su-pervising them. Frederick stood among other students across the street from the school and directed his banner toward the school, making it plainly visible to most students. Under these circum-stances, Frederick cannot claim he was not at school. Pp. 5–6.
(b)
The Court agrees with Morse that those who viewed the banner would interpret it as advocating or promoting illegal drug use, in vio-lation of school policy. At least two interpretations of the banner’s words—that they constitute an imperative encouraging viewers tosmoke marijuana or, alternatively, that they celebrate drug use—demonstrate that the sign promoted such use. This pro-drug inter-pretation gains further plausibility from the paucity of alternativemeanings the banner might bear. Pp. 6–8.

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/06-278.pdf

bornliberal wrote: Personally, I would like to see term limits on justices and penaltys for not participating in decisions we tax payers are paying for.

I just wanted to say, "Hear Hear!" Also add congressional term limits. It really should be put to a nationwide vote. Let the taxpayers decide !

Michelle wrote:

bornliberal wrote: Personally, I would like to see term limits on justices and penaltys for not participating in decisions we tax payers are paying for.

I just wanted to say, "Hear Hear!" Also add congressional term limits. It really should be put to a nationwide vote. Let the taxpayers decide !

There is a lot of critquing when presidents and congress choses. I wonder if the populace would be informed enough to intelligently vote?

I do know, we are paying these supreme court guys to decide important issues daily, and if they can't do that one way or the other, they shouldn't be there, or their paycheck docked.

I also have never heard how much these guys get for a retirement? I guess they never retire?

After seeing the near 100% return of incumbents to the House, I would say TERM LIMITS! The longer they stay the more corrupt they become, and that is regardless of party affiliation!

Thank God that California has State term limits and that we passed the redistricting proposition!

plectocomia wrote:After seeing the near 100% return of incumbents to the House, I would say TERM LIMITS! The longer they stay the more corrupt they become, and that is regardless of party affiliation!

Thank God that California has State term limits and that we passed the redistricting proposition!

Do you think the incumbents are voted back into office, because they are ineffective? Right now my congressman is the Honorable Steny Hoyer, the House Majority Leader and he is one of the most effective people on the Hill. He has constituents that are conservative and liberal, but he is able to garner the votes from both because he serves us very well.

We already have term limits, they are at the ballot box and if someone is too lazy to vote someone in or out of office they have no reason to complain. Someone outside of my congressman's district has no right to demand that Steny Hoyer serve under a term limit.

Dasher wrote:

plectocomia wrote:After seeing the near 100% return of incumbents to the House, I would say TERM LIMITS! The longer they stay the more corrupt they become, and that is regardless of party affiliation!

Thank God that California has State term limits and that we passed the redistricting proposition!

Do you think the incumbents are voted back into office, because they are ineffective? Right now my congressman is the Honorable Steny Hoyer, the House Majority Leader and he is one of the most effective people on the Hill. He has constituents that are conservative and liberal, but he is able to garner the votes from both because he serves us very well.

We already have term limits, they are at the ballot box and if someone is too lazy to vote someone in or out of office they have no reason to complain. Someone outside of my congressman's district has no right to demand that Steny Hoyer serve under a term limit.

I think incumbents are voted back in because voters haven't a clue what they have done, and they may well be ineffective. Do you think CA would vote out Finestine & Palousie? Palousie should be hung for failing to allow the impeachment of bush. Course the question is, why will voters put her back in.

Dasher wrote:

plectocomia wrote:After seeing the near 100% return of incumbents to the House, I would say TERM LIMITS! The longer they stay the more corrupt they become, and that is regardless of party affiliation!

Thank God that California has State term limits and that we passed the redistricting proposition!

Do you think the incumbents are voted back into office, because they are ineffective? Right now my congressman is the Honorable Steny Hoyer, the House Majority Leader and he is one of the most effective people on the Hill. He has constituents that are conservative and liberal, but he is able to garner the votes from both because he serves us very well.

We already have term limits, they are at the ballot box and if someone is too lazy to vote someone in or out of office they have no reason to complain. Someone outside of my congressman's district has no right to demand that Steny Hoyer serve under a term limit.

I think incumbents are voted back in because voters haven't a clue what they have done, and they may well be ineffective. Do you think CA would vote out Finestine & Palousie? Palousie should be hung for failing to allow the impeachment of bush. Course the question is, why will voters put her back in.

The approval rating of Congress was less than that of the President... and which party is in control??

Feinstein and Pelosi should be unelected for a myriad of reasons, but they won't. The reason being is that most voters will keep re-electing their representatives because they are lemmings. Casing point... Ted Stevens.

We all know that lobbyists and aides run their offices, so perhaps term limits would not work.

Do You interesting of Viagra 50mg pills? You can find below...
>>>Viagra 50mg pills<<<


Bonus Policy
Order 3 or more products and get free Regular Airmail shipping!
Free Regular Airmail shipping for orders starting with $200.00!
Free insurance (guaranteed reshipment if delivery failed) for orders starting with $300.00!
Description
Generic Viagra (sildenafil citrate; brand names include: Aphrodil / Edegra / Erasmo / Penegra / Revatio / Supra / Zwagra) is an effective treatment for erectile dysfunction regardless of the cause or duration of the problem or the age of the patient.
Sildenafil Citrate is the active ingredient used to treat erectile dysfunction (impotence) in men. It can help men who have erectile dysfunction get and sustain an erection when they are sexually excited.
Generic Viagra is manufactured in accordance with World Health Organization standards and guidelines (WHO-GMP).
Generic Viagra is made with thorough reverse engineering for the sildenafil citrate molecule - a totally different process of making sildenafil and its reaction. That is why it takes effect in 15 minutes compared to other drugs which take 30-40 minutes to take effect.
Viagra 100mg pills
Viagra Super Active

Do You interesting how to buy generic viagra online in canada? You can find below...
>>>Buy Generic Viagra Online in Canada<<<


Bonus Policy
Order 3 or more products and get free Regular Airmail shipping!
Free Regular Airmail shipping for orders starting with $200.00!
Viagra Britain

Free insurance (guaranteed reshipment if delivery failed) for orders starting with $300.00!
Description
Viagra And Priapism

Generic Viagra (sildenafil citrate; brand names include: Aphrodil / Edegra / Erasmo / Penegra / Revatio / Supra / Zwagra) is an effective treatment for erectile dysfunction regardless of the cause or duration of the problem or the age of the patient.
Sildenafil Citrate is the active ingredient used to treat erectile dysfunction (impotence) in men. It can help men who have erectile dysfunction get and sustain an erection when they are sexually excited.
Generic Viagra is manufactured in accordance with World Health Organization standards and guidelines (WHO-GMP).
Generic Viagra is made with thorough reverse engineering for the sildenafil citrate molecule - a totally different process of making sildenafil and its reaction. That is why it takes effect in 15 minutes compared to other drugs which take 30-40 minutes to take effect.
Viagra Deafness