Our Libertarian Court: Bong Hits and the Enduring Hamiltonian-Jeffersonian Colloquy
Our Libertarian Court: Bong Hits and the Enduring Hamiltonian-Jeffersonian Colloquy
Kenneth W. Starr, 12 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 1
The Supreme Court’s decision in Morse v. Frederick, otherwise known as the “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” case, highlights the non-realization of Chief Justice Roberts’s goal of greater cohesion and unanimity among the nine Justices. Bong Hits is an example of the Chief Justice appearing increasingly among the majority, Justice Stevens speaking vigorously for the minority, and Justice Thomas’s iconoclastic approach to constitutional issues. Importantly, the case also reveals a trend of alliance between Justices Kennedy and Alito and their shared Hamiltonian skepticism of local power, as well as Chief Justice Roberts’ unsuccessful attempts to limit constitutional questions to narrow grounds of decision. This Essay explores the divided factions of the Court through the lens of Bong Hits and offers further insight into the Justices’ constitutional jurisprudence.
Other articles from the “Speech and the Public Schools After Morse v. Frederick” Symposium at Lewis and Clark Law School are available (via First Amendment Law Prof).