Three Bad Rulings (NYT)

[Hawaii Hiker]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/opinion/26tue1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

I agree, especially the Bong Hits for Jesus case, :banghead:

[peacebird]

1. thank you Congress for rolling over and letting Roberts rule

:grr:

this is but the tip of the iceberg, Roberts is young and these cretins are appointed for LIFE.

[Goblinmonger]

2. I'm two for three

I think they were right on the Bong Hits case. He was at a school-sponsored event and he had a HUGE sign that made reference to drug use. Schools certainly have the right to limit speech that is in reference to drug use. The Principal (who I think is a complete ass for some of the other things she had done to this same kid) asked the kid to take it down and he didn't. If he had, everything I have read indicates that he would not have been suspended. The kid admits he did it to piss off the Principal which seems to be to be a disruption which puts that act clearly within the language of Tinker.

The other two rulings are poop.

[Solo_in_MD]

3. I support the removal of the ads restriction...

Political speech has to be the freest speech