|
Either it is political speech, in which John Roberts was right on its intent but still wrong (IMO) on what could be done about it or it isn't political speech in which case the majority was not only wrong in whether the school has the authority to proscribe such speech but about whether such speech even happened.
Now, my only complaint about the defendant side in that case is that the kid didn't have the balls to say "Yes, it was a pro-pot message. So what."
|