STUDENT SUSPENDED FOR SIGN: END HOMEWORK

Let me see if I understand this. A high school student was suspended for unfurling a sign on a public street, the content of which was inconsistent with the school's policy---in this case its anti-drug message. (NY Times 3/20/07) And the Supreme Court is struggling with this? Unless there was a factual finding below that this conduct was disruptive and part of a school function, it is inconceivable to me that the suspension can be sustained. The mere fact that the subject was drugs cannot possibly limit the student's free speech rights.

Suppose the sign read: "Legalize Pot"? And let's take out of the equation that the sign was displayed in a public forum and not in school or at a school function. Suppose, in a classroom devoted to teaching the students the dangers of drugs,a student announced that he believed that marijuana should be legal. Could that student be suspended because he enunciated a view that was inconsistent with the school's policy regarding drugs?

And if the argument is not limited to drugs, but encompasses all speech contrary to the stated goals or policies of the school, what of the student who unfurls a sign outside the school: "Bring Back Prayer in the Schools" or "End Homework" or "Stop Dissecting Frogs"? I can understand that the Court is anxious to establish some guidance regarding the limits, if any, to student speech, but boy, is this the wrong case to do that!