McVerry concluded that “the school administration lacked authority to punish Justin for his off-campus creation of a Trosch profile,” but acknowledged “this decision is a close call and Defendants’ reaction to the unflattering profile was understandable.”

The judge said he would not comment on whether the profile was a parody, as the Layshocks claimed, or defamatory, as the district claimed. That decision is up to the courts.

Trosch has filed a defamation suit against Layshock and the purported creators of two of the other profiles.

McVerry also:

• Removed Trosch, co-principal Chris Gill and Superintendent Karen A. Ionta from the suit, Trosch because he was not involved in disciplining Justin, and Mrs. Ionta and Gill because they have qualified immunity to the charges, even though they violated Justin’s’ free-speech rights.

• Turned aside the Layshocks’ claims that district policies are vague and overbroad. “The administration misapplied them in this case,” he said.

• Ruled against Mr. and Mrs. Layshock’s claim that the school punishment interfered with their rights to discipline Justin. Schools have the authority to discipline students, and the Layshocks could not describe how the school interfered with their rights. They still are permitted to act in the suit on behalf of Justin, who was 17 at the time he was suspended.

• Said a trial will be held to determine what compensatory damages should be paid to Justin. Justin has until July 30 to file a pretrial statement, and the district Aug. 20 to file its statement. A pretrial conference will be held on Sept. 6. No trial date was set.