BARGAIN DEBASEMENT

During the half-time show at Sunday's Super Bowl, 2,500 teen-agers crowded
around a heart-shaped stage and waved glow sticks at the Irish band U2.
Some viewers found the performance stirring; others might have considered
it a little schmaltzy.

But everyone should be able to agree on at least one thing: The mere
presence of glow sticks during the half-time show did not touch off
widespread use of party drugs in the Superdome. The idea that a glow stick
- -- a perfectly legal and perfectly harmless inanimate object -- somehow
encourages drug abuse is too preposterous to take seriously.

Nevertheless, prosecutors insist that such objects "enhance the high" of
the so-called party drug Ecstasy, and that notion was the basis for a plea
agreement between the U.S. attorney's office and Barbecue of New Orleans, a
company that promotes raves at the State Palace Theatre. Under that
agreement, the company agreed to ban the use of glow sticks, pacifiers and
other rave-related items from future events at the theater.

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Thomas Porteous ruled that the restriction
cannot legally be enforced, and he was wise to do so.

Judge Porteous concluded that requiring promoters to ban the items in
question violated ravegoers' First Amendment right to free expression. "The
government cannot keep legal items out of places because of illegal
activities they associate with them," the judge wrote.

He's right. Banning glow sticks to combat drug use at raves makes about as
much sense as banning tie-dyed clothes to prevent the use of marijuana.

Nevertheless, federal prosecutors took the widespread use of glow sticks at
State Palace Theatre raves as an indication that three local rave
organizers were encouraging the use of the so-called party drug Ecstasy.
And early last year, they secured an indictment against the organizers
under a federal "crack house" law forbidding people to maintain a building
for the purposes of drug sales.

To keep the three men out of jail, Barbecue of New Orleans, a company run
by one of them, agreed to plead guilty. It also agreed to pay a $100,000
fine and to ban rave paraphernalia in the future. Prosecutors could then
claim victory.

But in an interesting twist, the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit
in August to lift the ban on glow sticks, and Judge Porteous quickly issued
a preliminary injunction against the provision. On Monday he made that
injunction permanent.

The judge acknowledges that "the intentions of the agents and prosecutors
involved were pure," and no doubt they did want to keep ravegoers from
being injured through the abuse of party drugs. Rave promoters should have
the same goal. But prosecutors cannot protect the public by finding
questionable interpretations of laws that are overly vague, and they
shouldn't even try.