This paper is a presentation, in outline form, of the development of the "quasi-nonpublic forum," where cases involving student free speech push the envelope of what is acceptable under Constitutional law and what is appropriate/acceptable student behavior under constraints set by school regulations. Context is set by presenting court decisions regarding students' constitutional rights, such as "Tinker versus Des Moines Independent Community School District" (students wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War) and "Hazelwood School District versus Kulhmeier," in which school administration excised material from the school-sponsored newspaper. Later cases tell of the erosion of the Tinker/Fraser/Kulhmeier Standard, students' constitutional rights not being co-extensive with those of adults, and the drawing of the line involving religious proselytizing on school grounds during school session hours. The cases presented demonstrate a convergence of three trends in contemporary constitutional jurisprudence: the neutrality principle in Establishment Clause jurisprudence; the eliding of Establishment Clause and Free Speech analyses, especially when Free Speech is combined with Free Exercise Clause arguments; and the diminution of students' Constitutional rights generally. Questions remain, for example: Is the government dictating the content of people's prayers when courts command that religious speech not be proselytizing? (RT)