School committee members and the administrators they hire should have the ability to set curriculum and establish policy in public schools. That is, after all, why we elect or pay them.

But not so in Andover, where the leader of the teachers union is challenging the right of school leadership to establish a "controversial speakers" policy. Union President Tom Meyers says that's a change of workplace conditions under the teachers' contract and should be subject to collective bargaining.

Worse, when Andover school administrators sought teachers' input in formulating the policy, the teachers were warned off by the Massachusetts Teachers Association. The association sent them letters stating that any participation in these "illegal" discussions on a speakers policy would expose them to personal liability for censoring their colleagues' First Amendment rights.

Do teachers recognize any limits whatsoever on their in-class activities? Judging from Meyers' actions, it seems they do not.

The controversy extends from last year when a group of six teachers - one of whom was Meyers - invited the radical pro-Palestinian group Wheels of Justice to speak to high school students. Parents and community leaders objected, saying the group was extremist and anti-Israel. On the day in October that Wheels of Justice was to speak, the event was canceled.

School administrators offered to hold a forum that would include speakers favorable to the Israeli side of the Middle Eastern conflict. But Meyers refused and threatened to sue. High school Principal Peter Anderson relented, and the Wheels of Justice speakers returned in January, followed a few days later by pro-Israel speakers.

As a result, the Andover School Committee adopted a "controversial speakers" policy that sets guidelines for admitting outside speakers into Andover's classrooms. Speakers are only allowed if they address topics within the curriculum. The policy also bans teachers from expressing partisan viewpoints in their classrooms and requires them to get their principal's permission before inviting speakers to school.

The policy makes good sense. It assures that Andover's classrooms are for learning, not indoctrination with a teacher's personal political views.

If school administrators and school committees have no authority to set policy, then teachers are subject to no direction whatsoever. No curriculum - the collection of knowledge we expect children to be taught - is possible. Any rule, guideline, policy or suggestion is an infringement on teachers' sacred First Amendment rights. Teachers are free to teach whatever they want, by whatever means they choose.

That's not a school. It's an asylum.