Supreme Court Question of the Day
Note that this category is distinct from “Courthouse Quote of the Week.” But it comes from the same case: the “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” case, in which some young punk held up a banner with that slogan, in front of a high school where they were running the Olympic torch. And now, without further ado . . . Patterico’s “Supreme Court Question of the Day”:
JUSTICE GINSBURG: So if the sign had been “Bong Stinks for Jesus,” that would be, and Morse had the same reaction, that this was demeaning to the Olympics and it was unruly conduct, that there would be a protected right under Tinker because the message was not promoting drugs?
The question, by the way, was posed to Kenneth Starr, who quickly set Justice Ginsburg straight on the whole concept of bong hits.
Not.
Too bad we didn’t have that other Justice Ginsburg there. He could have explained it to her.
Read the transcript here.
From what I remember, bongs do kind of stink.
Kevin (e89cee) — 3/20/2007 @ 5:32 amWas there an “in loco parentis” argument?
nk (cbd34d) — 3/20/2007 @ 10:05 amkevin, bongs stink when you use them to smoke cheapshit mexican boo. try the good stuff sometime.
assistant devil's advocate (c54e63) — 3/20/2007 @ 11:00 amI just read Althouse’s commentary on this. Your posts were better, Justin and Patterico.
DRJ (53e939) — 3/20/2007 @ 11:59 am[…] posts are here, here, here, here and here and, as noted at the last link, there are plans to make this incident into a […]
Patterico's Pontifications » “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” Student Nets $45,000 (ad4391) — 3/18/2010 @ 1:03 pm