Reply #130: Her lawyers would never have argued her position on anything but

[No Elephants]

freedom of speech. (Free exercise of religion would have been a weaker argument inasmuch as speaking at a graduation is not an essential of anyone's religion.) It would be the school that would have defended its actions in turning off her mike with the Establishment Clause and the SCOTUS decisions interpreting that clause. Neither position was argued in the Supreme Court, however, bc the SCOTUS refused to hear (or decide) this particular case.

Minors do have First Amendment rights. Time and place restrictions are appropriate limits on rights, be they free exercise of religion rights or free speech rights. And, within the public school context, those rights are balanced against the needs of the school to do such things as maintain discipline and safety and, in cases like this, the rights of others to be free from religious speech during a government-sponsored activity, not to mention the school's right to keep its activities within the Constitution.