Update: SCOTUS

As I opened my Inbox, I was pleased to get see some high-powered perspective on l'affaire Bong Hits, which I blogged about here.

No less an authority than David Masci, a senior research fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, has posted a legal analysis on how some Christian groups are finding themselves on the same side as Joseph Frederick, the teen who advocated "Bong Hits for Jesus" on a banner unfurled at a school event.

...more than a few eyebrows were raised when the likes of the American Center for Law and Justice, a Christian public interest law firm founded by Pat Robertson, submitted an amicus brief on behalf of Frederick. Yet ACLJ, as well as other similar organizations, see a clear parallel between Frederick's plight and that of many religious, especially Christian, students around the country. "School districts must not be entrusted with the authority to arbitrarily determine what student speech is offensive and off limits," the group said in a statement released on the day of the Supreme Court oral argument. "In the future, that could put all student speech at risk -- including speech that advocates Christian beliefs on any issue."

Aside from ACLJ, who else is on Frederick's side? The ACLU, of course. Opposed? The National School Boards, drug policy groups, and... the Bush administration!

Strange Bedfellows indeed. But as Masci points out,

If the Supreme Court decides in favor of Frederick and against the school district, it will almost certainly strengthen the right of students, including religious students, to express opinions that other students and school officials find objectionable. This time, it's "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" that raised a principal's ire. But the Christian public interest groups involved in the Frederick case believe that next time it might be an entirely different, more reverential invocation of Christ's name that lands a student in hot water.