`Bong Hits 4 Jesus’ Case Finds Strange Legal Bedfellows

c. 2007 Religion News Service WASHINGTON _ It’s not every legal conflict that brings together the American Civil Liberties Union, a gay rights group and conservative Christian law firms _ on the same side. But Morse v. Frederick, the free speech case to be heard by the Supreme Court next Monday (March 19), is not […]

c. 2007 Religion News Service

WASHINGTON _ It’s not every legal conflict that brings together the American Civil Liberties Union, a gay rights group and conservative Christian law firms _ on the same side.

But Morse v. Frederick, the free speech case to be heard by the Supreme Court next Monday (March 19), is not your average litigation.


Christian lawyers say they disdain the speech in question _ a banner proclaiming “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” displayed by an Alaskan high school student in 2002 as the Olympic torch passed through his town.

“It’s disrespectful to God and disrespectful to believers,” said Kevin Theriot, an attorney for Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative Christian legal network based in Arizona.

Nonetheless, a number of Christian heavy-hitters, including ADF, the American Center for Law and Justice and the Christian Legal Society, have filed briefs defending the student.

“I’ve been doing religious (legal) work for almost two decades, and in my opinion this is probably one of the most dangerous cases to religious freedom in the last decade _ because you don’t think it’s about religion,” said Kelly Shackelford, chief counsel for Liberty Legal Institute. The Plano, Texas-based institute has filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the student.

The student, Joseph Frederick, now 23, said recently the banner was a “free speech experiment” and “was not intended as a drug or a religious message.”

After displaying the banner, Frederick was suspended from school and he sued his principal. In subsequent court cases, the school has argued that it has a right to squelch speech that promotes illegal behavior and runs afoul of school policy.

Given that broad power, schools could engage in “viewpoint censorship” and muffle all contentious speech _ from anti-abortion T-shirts to student-run Bible clubs, Christian lawyers said.


“It would give schools the authority to regulate all unpopular, controversial speech,” said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, a firm founded by Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson.

Still, a number of conservative Christian groups, fearful of being linked to drug promotion, have kept their distance from the case, said Shackelford.

Providing a hypothetical example, Shackelford said: “Imagine the headlines: `Lutherans Support Student Promoting Drugs.’ Most people wouldn’t get it; it looks to them like their denomination is supporting drugs.”

In a sound bite culture, that’s a legitimate concern, said Theriot. Though ADF usually promotes its involvement in free-speech cases, the firm has taken a low-profile approach to Morse v. Frederick.

“It’s very difficult to explain our position in a news release,” Theriot said.

The odd legal bedfellows brought together by Morse v. Frederick might also raise a few eyebrows.

The gay-rights group Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund Inc. and the ACLU, which often disagrees with conservative Christians in church-state cases, are both supporting the student.


The opposing counsel in the case is Kenneth W. Starr, the former independent counsel who investigated former President Bill Clinton and whose conservative Christian beliefs are well-known.

Asked how often his group has sided with the ALCU and Lambda against Starr, Theriot laughed, then turned serious.

“If schools can determine what is orthodox when it comes to what students believe,” he said, “that really is a problem.”

KRE/RB END BURKE

Donate to Support Independent Journalism!

Donate Now!