What If Teachers Could Search Student Belongings Without Any Necessary?

The case of Safford Unified School District v. Redding regards a 13 year old student, Savana Redding, who was accused by others of alleged drug dealing (prescription strength ibuprofen & over the counter naproxen) in school. After Redding was confronted by principal, Kerry Wilson, she denied any wrong doing and agreed to let Wilson and school administrator, Helen Romero, search her bag and outer clothing where nothing was found. Nevertheless, Redding was instructed by Wilson to the nurse’s office, and was striped searched by Romero and nurse, Peggy Schwallier. Wilson’s decision to strip search Redding was without reasonable cause (Scotusblog, 2017). The school officials clearly violated Redding’s fourth amendment right by conducting a strip

“Ultimately, the Supreme Court held 6-3 that the school’s search of T.L.O.’s purse was constitutional.” (Lannacci 2016). This essay will briefly examine the up till today open question that can never really be given a definite answer until applied in each case- “the applicability of the exclusionary rule in juvenile delinquency or criminal proceedings when the evidence has been seized in a school, by a school official, in violation of the Fourth Amendment.” (Stoddard 2011).

In the case of New Jersey VS TLO, a high school student was held for violating school rules, with possession of smoking and having other illegal belongings on school campus property, and with an argued statement about violating her fourth amendment rights against unreasonable searches. Two Piscataway Township high school freshmen girls were smoking cigarettes in the bathroom, where they were caught by a teacher who had seen them. The teacher walked up with the two girls to the principals office, in which they met with the assistant vice principal. They were both questioned individually about violating a school rule by smoking in the bathroom. One of the girls admitted to smoking, whom surely was disciplined under school

In the case of Vernonia v. Acton the fourth amendment is involved. The fourth amendment states that all people should be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Vernonia School District found that student athletes were participating in drug use after an official investigation, because of this they began requiring random drug testing for the students to participate in school sports. A student at the school, James Acton, and his parents did not consent to the random testing so he was not allowed to participate in football. Because he was not allowed, it was questioned if random drug testing of the student athletes violated the reasonable search and seizure clause of the fourth amendment.

The Majority Opinion: The Fourth Amendment does apply to searches performed on students in public schools, but it would be unreasonable for a school to be required to get a warrant every time they need to perform a search. As minors, students do not have the same rights as adults. Any searched must be of a student of the school who is reasonably suspected of wrongdoing. Student must be suspected of violating the law or school rules before the search and the search must not be inappropriate for the age and sex of the person being searched. Because the search of T.L.O.’s purse was conducted on reasonable suspicion of violating the school’s rules, the search was valid. Based on these points, the decision of the Supreme Court of New Jersey was reversed by a vote of 6 to

Justice Thomas had a dissenting opinion and stated that the fourth amendment right does protect us against unreasonable search and seizures (as did most of the judges). But it is the context of were it takes place he says students have the fourth amendment right just not on school property. The reason is the responsibility the school and the officials have is to ensure the safety of the students. Thomas concurred in the

The Fourth Amendment to the constitution protects United States citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. Our forefathers recognized the harm and abuses that occurred in the colonies to innocent people by the British, and they made sure to write protections into the U.S. Constitution. Fearing the police state that any nation has the potential to become and recognizing that freedom and liberty is meaningless when victimization by the police is a real and foreboding threat the Fourth Amendment was created. The Fourth Amendment has gone through many challenges and controversies in the past, and currently the issue of how the Fourth Amendment applies to students in public schools has come to be contended in the courts. While it is

The fourth amendment to the constitution of the United States of America protect individuals from illegal search and seizure. Nonetheless, students are protected under the fourth amendment in school; however, the standard for the courts have applied a different standard for what constitute a legal search. In New Jersey v. T.L.O the courts ruled that the, “unique need to maintain a safe learning environment requires a lessening of the restrictions normally imposed for public officials to conduct searches.” Thus, the requirement for schools to search a student is reasonable suspicion and not probable cause. There are some factors that must exist raise reasonable suspicion. For example, reasonable suspicion may include: a call from a concern

Ever since the first school shooting, a lot of people have changed their beliefs on this subject. I was in eighth grade when the shooting at Columbine High School took place. Before that shooting, I never would have considered something like that happening. Now, it is seventeen years later and school shootings almost seem like an everyday thing. That is sad, but it is true. This is why I believe a student should not have a high expectation of privacy while at school. The law used to be more lenient, but these circumstances have changed that. Right after Columbine, a lot of states had a zero tolerance law. According to the Center for Public Education site, this law said that if a student was caught with contraband they were given a strict punishment, no matter what the circumstance was. The laws have changed some over the last few years, and are not quite as strict as that. The schools still have to ensure that every student is safe, though. It is common for schools to have metal detectors or bring in dogs on a regular basis. Once they have a reason to suspect a student, they have the right to search their belongings. I believe this is well within their rights as administrators who are trying to protect the school as a whole. I realize that students may feel violated, I have been there. It was always an inconvenience to have to sit outside the hallways while the dogs searched each room. I never felt like it was wrong when they did find something though. So many students would bring large amounts of drugs, guns and knives to school. If it weren’t for the measures that the school took they would just be walking around with these items. I hope these laws never change, and my kids have the same protection that I did. I would hate to imagine my child going to school with guns and drugs within an arm’s reach. I believe the issue of student’s privacy is one that many people can agree with each other on.

Say if a student gets in trouble because they have something bad on their phone the school has a right to search through

While there are several legal reasons to maintain the privacy of students, there are also many ethical ones, such as not wanting to expose students to embarrassing disclosures or discrimination. For example, teachers at High School One have access to student data concerning health issues. I have had student who experience seizures, who have diabetes, and rare allergies. While

Our rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, has been hollowed out. Student press in schools can have reports censored by the school and equipment confiscated by the administration because the First Amendment, supporting the freedom of the press does not apply student reports who fall under the supervision of the education system’s administrative branch, who have total power over the student newspaper. Our freedom of speech and privacy are not even close to what they promise. For reasons such as national security, the government can censor, retain, deny, or even manipulate selected pieces of information. Saying keywords on the phone or in emails that monitoring agencies are looking for can give them clearance to investigate your intentions. Privacy, once thought to be a guaranteed right, is actually only able to be enforced by those who choose to.

Now addressing the complete disrespect and breach of privacy when it comes to school lockers. Lockers aren’t ever really safe, it’s true. If wanted/required a security guard can easily unlock your locker at any point in time during a school day. And you might be thinking: “Okay? So what, they’re just kids” well newsflash, kids have rights too. K-12, the upper echelons of the education system sometimes out right accuse these poor students of harboring drugs and other unlawful paraphernalia within their lockers, and takes upon themselves to undergo what they call “a locker search”, or in other words. “Breach of privacy example number 3”.

Although there are many, loving and caring students all around the world.Many students in school could have firearms and drugs on school grounds at anytime around during school hours and after. There are also bad things about searching there lockers you could maybe go through their privacy and personal belongings.

The intent of the Fourth Amendment is to guarantee security against unreasonable governmental searches. Because school officials are actually