COURT WILL JUST SAY NO, BUT TO DRUGS -- OR FREE SPEECH?

Ex-Student Says 'Bong' Sign Was Protected Speech; Ex-Principal Says
It Promoted Drugs

WASHINGTON -- High school students may have a right to free speech,
but it does not go so far as to include the freedom to unfurl a banner
promoting "bong hits" at a school event, former U.S. Solicitor General
Kenneth Starr told the Supreme Court on Monday.

"This is disruptive of the educational mission and inconsistent with
the school's message" against using drugs, Starr said.

Starr represents a former school principal from Juneau, Alaska, who
was sued for ripping down the banner and suspending the student who
unfurled it.

The case forces the court to reconsider the line between a student's
right to free speech and a principal's authority to limit what is said
and done at school.

Justice Samuel Alito said it would be disturbing if principals had
such broad authority to pass judgment on what students say at or near
school.

But Starr said the court could give principals the power to forbid
promotion of drugs, alcohol or tobacco. "This case is ultimately about
drugs," he said.

Douglas Mertz, the former student's lawyer from Juneau, countered,
"This is a case about free speech. This is not a case about drugs."

His client, Joseph Frederick, was an 18-year-old senior in 2002 when
an Olympic torch parade was to pass in front of his high school. As
the local TV cameras came by, he and a few students unfurled a 14-foot
"Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner.

Principal Deborah Morse tore down the sign, and when Frederick invoked
Thomas Jefferson and the First Amendment, she doubled her planned
five-day suspension to 10. He sued.

In 1969, the Supreme Court upheld the right of high school students to
wear black arm bands to protest the war. But it said principals and
teachers need not tolerate disruptive speech or protests.

During Monday's argument, Chief Justice John Roberts said the banner
was disruptive.