EXPERT: 'BONG HITS' RULING UNLIKELY TO HAVE MUCH IMPACT

Monday's Supreme Court ruling in a highly publicized "Bong Hits 4
Jesus" case involving an Alaska high school student probably will
have little impact on student expression.

That's the opinion of an expert on the First Amendment in the wake of
the eagerly awaited ruling.

Robert D. Richards, distinguished professor of journalism and law at
Penn State University, had another question as well: what does the
"bong hits" phrase actually mean?

The court declared that public schools can prohibit student speech
advocating drug use.

The case involves Joseph Frederick, who, as a high school student in
Juneau, Alaska, in 2002, unfurled a 14-foot banner containing the
slogan while the Olympic torch was being carried on its way to Salt Lake City.

Frederick was suspended, prompting a civil rights lawsuit, according
to the Associated Press.

The court ruled 5-4 in favor of the school district, it said.

But Richards suggested it was "a stretch" for the court to determine
the message on the banner advocated drug use.

"I understand why (the court is) doing it, but I think it is a
stretch for the majority to find it a pro-drug message," said
Richards, who is a founding co-director of the Pennsylvania Center
for the First Amendment.

Even Frederick acknowledged the message was nonsense and was intended
as a way of proclaiming his right to free speech, the Associated
Press reported.

Richards suggested the ruling will have little impact on student
rights. A law already in place prohibits lewd, offensive and vulgar
speech by students in public schools, and the court cited that law in
making its decision in the Alaska case, he said.

In addition, the decision does not do away with all types of student
expression, he said.

"It's a very narrow ruling," Richards said. "They simply said they
found (the slogan) to be a pro-drug message and decided schools could
be consistent with the First Amendment and bar pro-drug messages."