Silly BS. If I want to pay 40k+ and sit in the classroom and read espn.com, then I should have the right. We're freaking adults. What's next, installing porn-filters on the library computers?
On the other hand, law schools reasonably could argue that browsing the internet, chatting via an instant messenging client, or writing e-mails during class can be distracting to other students surrounding the one doing those activities. Relying on that premise, it may make sense to ban internet use in the class.
In essence, although one student may not wish to pay attention on a given day, it's not fair to other students if they are distracted by the first student, especially if these other students really do want to hear what's going on in class. After all, these other students who are being distracted are also paying $40,000 to sit in the class.
This is not the correct response. If someone gets distracted that easily they have bigger fish to fry than laptop use in class. If different colors on a screen four feet away from you makes it so you can't pay attention that is sad. How are you going to manage in a work environment if you get distracted that easily. If you asked people in the cubicle to make it so you can't hear their music they will probably laugh their head off. Don't punish other people because of your inability to pay attention. That is like asking people to not drive flashy cars because other people can't pay attention on the road and it may cause an accident.
While I don't think someone paying 40,000 dollars is a good enough reason alone to let them use the internet I do think people can limit internet use if they wanted to. It is their school and their internet. I, however, would sign the petition to make internet use permitted in class again.