No one appreciates the First Amendment more than newspapers. Equally true is that since being adopted and ratified more than 200 years ago, this sacred pledge of individual freedom from government meddling has been tested in courts time and time again. Sometimes the issue has national significance, such as the constitutionality of public school-sponsored prayer. Sometimes the issue has far less significance, such as whether a high school can cancel a prom because two girls want to attend as a couple, with one of them dressed in clothes usually identified with males.

Last week, U.S. District Judge Glen H. Davidson looked at the law and found there was no requirement that the Itawamba County school district sponsor a prom. That being the situation, Davidson correctly ruled the school board was free to hold a prom or not hold a prom for a good reason, a bad reason or no reason at all.

Davidson then turned to the plaintiff, senior Constance McMillen, 18, who testified she’d known since the eighth grade that she is a lesbian and had asked to wear a tux to the prom and attend with a same-sex date. Davidson correctly ruled that because she intended to communicate a message by these actions, her choices fell “squarely within the purview of the First Amendment.”

In sum, this case was mostly a stunt, fully in keeping with the American Civil Liberties Union’s stated purpose of continually challenging government actions. That doesn’t mean Ms. McMillen’s rights are any more or any less important than anyone else’s — just that this has been a case of more salacious interest than anything else.

And the good news is that the First Amendment survives yet again.