Assess students' ability to apply U.S. Supreme Court student‑speech precedents—Tinker v. Des Moines (substantial disruption/test for independent student expression), Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (school‑sponsored/curricular control), and Morse v. Frederick (school authority to restrict pro‑drug messages)—to hypothetical high‑school scenarios. Students should identify the governing standard for each fact pattern (on‑campus vs. off‑campus, curricular vs. extracurricular, sponsored activity, safety/disruption), analyze relevant facts, conclude whether a school's restriction is likely constitutional, and justify conclusions with legal reasoning and precedent.