[jude24]

However, the Judge would be on really thin legal ice trying to classify an 18 year old high school senior chosen by fellow students to deliver remarks, or a valedictorian who earned her spot on the podium, as "a student acting in an official capacity" and prohibiting her from mentioning God or declaring that "God is dead" or declaring whether she thinks "Bush lied and people died" or that "Hillary Clinton is a traitor".

Actually, it would seem clear under agency law that the student would be acting in the shoes of the government and so would be considered their agent.

[Polybius]

However, the Judge would be on really thin legal ice trying to classify an 18 year old high school senior chosen by fellow students to deliver remarks, or a valedictorian who earned her spot on the podium, as "a student acting in an official capacity" and prohibiting her from mentioning God or declaring that "God is dead" or declaring whether she thinks "Bush lied and people died" or that "Hillary Clinton is a traitor"......Polybius

Actually, it would seem clear under agency law that the student would be acting in the shoes of the government and so would be considered their agent.......jude24

This is no longer a hypothetical. This actually happened.

So, in this Real World case, since Megan Chapman not only mentioned God but talked at length about God in her opening remarks, how is the Judge going to penalize her and how far do you think it will go up the appellate courts before a higher Court slaps down the Judge for violating Chapman's Free Exercise Clause constitutional rights?

I am betting my money that the Judge's response to Chapman's action will be: