Okay guys, if this isn’t a sign that things might not be “all right” I don’t know what will be.

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled against an Alaskan high school student who unfurled a banner that said “bong hits for jesus” on it, while on his own personal time.

They also overturned a ban on corporate sponsored political ads, saying:

The ruling in the election case is likely to be seen and felt by voters starting early next year. It could mean a return to the 1990s when TV viewers were often urged to “send a message” to an unspecified candidate about his or her stand on a certain issue.

These ads were often paid for with corporate or union money, and they were banned by the McCain-Feingold Act five years ago. The Supreme Court upheld the ban in a 5-4 decision before the 2004 election.

But the high court essentially changed course today and said these issue-oriented ads are legal if they name a candidate running for office, so long as they stop short of urging the public to vote for or against the candidate.

The chief justice said these ads involve “core political speech”, which is protected by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.

“We give the benefit of the doubt to speech, not censorship,” Roberts said. He was joined by Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Anthony M. Kennedy. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas agreed, although they would have gone further and struck down entirely the broadcast ban set in the McCain-Feingold Act.

The benefit of the doubt huh? I think what “his honor” meant was we give the benefit of the doubt to corporations, not ordinary people.