Comments on: Round-Up http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/round-up-85/ The Supreme Court of the United States blog Mon, 23 Jan 2012 22:38:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Hans Bader http://www.scotusblog.com/2007/03/round-up-85/#comment-10962 Hans Bader Fri, 02 Mar 2007 14:20:30 +0000 http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/round-up-85/#comment-10962 One of the arguments made in Morse v. Frederick, the student speech case that Joan Biskupic wrote about, is that the student's speech was supposedly not protected because it was not "political" in nature. But speech need not be "political" to be protected by the First Amendment. "It is immaterial whether the beliefs sought to be advanced . . . pertain to political, economic, religious, or cultural matters." NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 460 (1958). The First Amendment protects not only the right to engage in political speech, but also any "expression about philosophical, social, artistic, economic, literary, or ethical matters." Moreover, a student's speech need not be on a matter of public concern, much less be political, to be protected. See, e.g., Pinard v. Clatskanie School District, 446 F.3d 964, 973 (9th Cir. 2006); Garcia v. S.U.N.Y. Health Sciences Center, 280 F.3d 98, 106 (2d Cir. 2001); cf. Iota Xi Chapter of Sigma Chi Fraternity v. George Mason University, 993 F.2d 386 (4th Cir. 1993) (even low-grade, juvenile entertainment, such as a fraternity skit, is protected by the First Amendment). One of the arguments made in Morse v. Frederick, the student speech case that Joan Biskupic wrote about, is that the student’s speech was supposedly not protected because it was not “political” in nature.

But speech need not be “political” to be protected by the First Amendment. “It is immaterial whether the beliefs sought to be advanced . . . pertain to political, economic, religious, or cultural matters.” NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 460 (1958). The First Amendment protects not only the right to engage in political speech, but also any “expression about philosophical, social, artistic, economic, literary, or ethical matters.”

Moreover, a student’s speech need not be on a matter of public concern, much less be political, to be protected. See, e.g., Pinard v. Clatskanie School District, 446 F.3d 964, 973 (9th Cir. 2006); Garcia v. S.U.N.Y. Health Sciences Center, 280 F.3d 98, 106 (2d Cir. 2001); cf. Iota Xi Chapter of Sigma Chi Fraternity v. George Mason University, 993 F.2d 386 (4th Cir. 1993) (even low-grade, juvenile entertainment, such as a fraternity skit, is protected by the First Amendment).

]]>