CASE TESTS FREE SPEECH BOUNDS

School Officials React to Supreme Court Case on Student Banner.

In an Alaska case that was argued Monday before the Supreme Court,
justices probed an issue that could have significant student free
speech rights in U.S. schools.

At issue is where the line should be between a school's expectations
for appropriate speech and the student's right of self expression.

Whichever way the court decides, Justice Stephen Breyer said, there
will be serious ramifications.

On the one hand, Breyer said a ruling that favors the student could
mean "we'll suddenly see people testing limits all over the place in
the high schools." On the other hand, however, the liberal justice
added that a ruling favoring the school could "really limit people's
rights on free speech. That's what I'm struggling with."

In other words, the court's decision will make the already difficult
issue of school officials policing student expression even more difficult.

"To a certain extent, once they walk through the school door,"
Burlington High School Principal Tom Messinger said, citing Supreme
Court rulings in other cases, "students give up a portion of their
free speech. If the Supreme Court rules for the kid, it's definitely a
new message for schools on what is OK and what is not."

The case, Morse v. Frederick, arose after a high school principal in
Juneau, Alaska, suspended a senior for displaying a 14--foot banner
proclaiming "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" at a community event, claiming the
student was promoting drug use. The student claimed, however, that his
was a nonsensical statement created as an exercise in free speech.

Medium, message and intent aside, the case illustrates how views
differ between students and administrators over what is
appropriate.

At a pair of Burlington area high schools Tuesday, principals said
they deal only rarely with such matters, generally in the realm of how
students choose to express their opinions and their individuality
through how they dress.

Concerns over inappropriate modes of dress are far more common than
those having to do with what those clothes may have to say from a
political or commercial standpoint, Messinger said. Generally, the
number of problems is greatest the first month of school after summer
vacation. There could be a spike as students become aware of the issue
justices are now considering.

"There could be people testing the waters with it," Messinger
said.

Both he and Ron Teater, the principal at West Burlington High School,
said when they encounter a student whose dress they deem inappropriate
because its message promotes an illegal act -- which for students
includes tobacco and alcohol use -- or is disruptive to the
educational environment of the school, they simply ask that it be
turned inside out or covered, if not changed.

On Tuesday, for instance, Teater spoke with a boy whose shirt bore a
lengthy word that was purported to be a company name but started with
a certain four--letter word starting in "F." In that case, Teater said
he addressed the issue before it could cause a disruption.

The student admitted wearing the shirt to get the attention of
schoolmates and to create a buzz.

"I think he wanted to see what kind of a rise he could get out of us,"
Teater said.

Teater said he will generally "err on the conservative side" in
judging whether to challenge a student about his or her attire.

In deciding what constitutes a disruption, the West Burlington
principal said he is concerned when something a student is wearing
takes away from learning time in the classroom. Attention paid to a
T--shirt political statement that is limited to hallways and
cafeterias is less of a concern, Teater said.

Some things are easier to call a no--no than others. For instance,
Messinger said, a NASCAR T--shirt bearing a Budweiser logo would not
be allowed in school because it promotes alcohol consumption.
Likewise, he said, a shirt bearing a slogan of a hateful or
discriminatory nature are unacceptable.

More difficult are statements that have a double meaning.

"Those are really hard to judge," Teater said.

Neither principal could recall a time when they challenged a student
on his or her attire and the student came back with an argument about
freedom of expression. Even with such an assertion, principals have
the authority now to decide what is acceptable.

That could be about to change, depending on what the court says in a
ruling that is expected in July.

Should the court open the door to broader student rights of free
speech in school, Messinger said he hopes they will continue to show
respect for others in the messages they choose to wear.