Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
Morse v. Frederick
58°18′21″N 134°25′45″W / 58.3057°N 134.4291°W
| Morse v. Frederick | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued March 19, 2007 Decided June 25, 2007 | |
| Full case name | Deborah Morse and the Juneau School Board, et al., Petitioners v. Joseph Frederick |
| Docket no. | 06-278 |
| Citations | 551 U.S. 393 (more) 127 S. Ct. 2618; 168 L. Ed. 2d 290; 2007 U.S. LEXIS 8514; 75 U.S.L.W. 4487; 20 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 431; 220 Ed. Law Rep. 50; 07 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7248; 2007 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9448 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Summary judgment for defendant granted, No. J 02-008 CV(JWS), 2003 WL 25274689 (D. Alaska May 27, 2003); rev'd, 439 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2006); cert. granted, 127 S. Ct. 722 (2006) |
| Holding | |
| Because schools may take steps to safeguard those entrusted to their care from speech that can be regarded as encouraging illegal drug use, the school officials in this case did not violate the First Amendment by confiscating the pro-drug banner and suspending Frederick. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Roberts, joined by Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito |
| Concurrence | Thomas |
| Concurrence | Alito, joined by Kennedy |
| Concur/dissent | Breyer |
| Dissent | Stevens, joined by Souter, Ginsburg |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. I, XIV; 42 U.S.C. § 1983 | |
Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007), is a United States Supreme Court case where the Court held, 5–4, that the First Amendment does not prevent educators from prohibiting or punishing student speech that is reasonably viewed as promoting illegal drug use.[1][2]
In 2002, Juneau-Douglas High School principal Deborah Morse suspended student Joseph Frederick after he displayed a banner reading "BONG HiTS 4 JESUS" [sic] across the street from the school during the 2002 Winter Olympics torch relay.[3] Frederick sued, claiming his constitutional rights to free speech were violated. His suit was dismissed by the federal district court, but on appeal, the Ninth Circuit reversed the ruling, concluding that Frederick's speech rights were violated. The case then went on to the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, concluded that school officials did not violate the First Amendment. To do so, he made three legal determinations. First, under the existing school speech precedents Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986) and Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988), students do have free speech rights in school,[4] but those rights are subject to limitations in the school environment that would not apply to the speech rights of adults outside school.[5] Supreme Court cases since Tinker have generally sided with schools when student conduct rules have been challenged on free speech grounds.[6] Second, the "school speech" doctrine applied because Frederick's speech occurred at a school-supervised event. Finally, the Court held that the speech could be restricted in a school environment, even though it wasn't disruptive under the Tinker standard, because "the government interest in stopping student drug abuse...allow[s] schools to restrict student expression that they reasonably regard as promoting illegal drug use."[7][2][8]
- ^ "Morse et al. v. Frederick" (PDF). SupremeCourt.gov. Supreme Court of the United States. June 25, 2007. Retrieved April 16, 2020.
- ^ a b "Facts and Case Summary - Morse v. Frederick". United States Courts.
The Court held that schools may "take steps to safeguard those entrusted to their care from speech that can reasonably be regarded as encouraging illegal drug use" without violating a student's First Amendment rights.
- ^ Mears, Bill (March 19, 2007). "High court hears 'Bong hits 4 Jesus' case". CNN.
- ^ Cf. Common law in loco parentis where students had no constitutional rights in school.
- ^ "Know Your Rights: Student Rights". ACLU.
- ^ "Juneau School Board Policy No. 5520 states: “The Board specifically prohibits any assembly or public expression that … advocates the use of substances that are illegal to minors … .” In addition, Juneau School Board Policy No. 5850 subjects “[p]upils who participate in approved social events and class trips” to the same student conduct rules that apply during the regular school program." Morse v. Frederick at 398
- ^ Russo, Charles J. (2008). Encyclopedia of Education Law Volume 1. Sage Publications. p. 560.
- ^ Denning, Brannon P. (2019). Glannon Guide to Constitutional Law. Wolters Kluwer.
Previous Page Next Page
