changing the back of the t-shirt to "Be Happy, Be Straight." Mrs. Zamecnik granted permission to do that[5] and she spoke to Zamecnik to inform her that was what would be done. When Mrs. Zamecnik came to pick up Zamecnik at the end of the school day, Zamecnik discovered *527 that "Be Straight" had not been added to the back of her t-shirt.
Plaintiff's claim against Wells has two aspects. The first is being prevented from continuing to display "Be Happy, Not Gay" on the back of her t-shirt. The second is being prevented from displaying "Be Happy, Be Straight" as an alternative message.
It is undisputed that NVHS has a policy of promoting tolerance and prohibiting derogatory comments based on protected categories.
In resolving questions of qualified immunity, it firsthigh school student from displaying negative statements about a category of persons, including homosexuals, that are inconsistent with the school's educational goal of promoting tolerance. Wells did not violate Zamecnik's free speech rights when he prohibited her from displaying the slogan "Be Happy, Not Gay" while in school. Therefore, Wells is entitled to dismissal of the damages claim against him to the extent it is based on preventing plaintiff from having that slogan on the back of her t-shirt. Even if it is incorrect to conclude that Wells could delete "Not Gay" without violating Zamecnik's speech rights, Wells would be entitled to qualified immunity because case law supporting the right of a high school student to display "Be Happy, Not Gay" in a high school that promoted tolerance