Searches, Seizures, and the Fourth Amendment

Many schools have the right to search students and seize things that may raise suspicion or interrupt the learning process of the school. While this may be concerning to some, the school should be able to search students as long as there is proof or reasoning that any item they are carrying is detrimental to the school or anyone within the school.

A 14-year-old freshman at Piscataway High School in New Jersey named T.L.O. was found smoking in the bathroom. Her possession of cigarettes, rolling papers, and a small amount of marijuana led to a landmark case on search and seizure at school. The case was named New Jersey v. T.L.O. After her case went to trial and Terry was found guilty of possession of marijuana, the freshman appealed her conviction, stating that the search of her purse violated her Fourth Amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures.” The court eventually ruled in favor of the school because the school had the responsibility for “maintaining the environment in which learning can take place.” In other words, since the school had reasonable suspicion that Terry was committing a crime, the search was legal and legitimate.

Ten years later, a similar case came up in Vernonia, Oregon. The school district authorized a random drug test for all student athletes since there was a known drug problem and lack of discipline throughout the district. A seventh grader named James Acton and his parents refused to agree to the drug test, claiming it was violating his Fourth Amendment rights. The family sued the school after he was not allowed to participate in football that year. The case became known as the Vernonia School District v. Acton. The court ruled in favor of the school, stating that student’s rights at school have to be balanced with the school’s responsibility to provide a safe environment, and that drug use and lack of discipline was not ensuring a safe environment.

While there are reasons for school districts to conduct searches throughout the country, there are some cases where these searches should be found illegal or unnecessary to begin with.

One of these cases is from 2009, known as the Safford Unified School District v. Redding. Thirteen-year-old Savana Redding had been accused of carrying prescription-strength Ibuprofen to school with her and handing it out to other students in her school. Some school officials questioned her and forced her to strip down to her underwear. They then continued the search inside her undergarments, finding nothing. The case revealed a gender fault line at the Supreme Court. The judges ruled against the school, protecting students from further strip searches within schools.

The school districts within the country have the responsibility to keep their students safe while giving them a productive learning environment. This may mean getting involved if the safety of staff or students is threatened. There are times when these searches may be unnecessary or seen as tedious, but they will not always violate students’ Fourth Amendment rights.

Supporting Articles:

“Your 4th Amendment Rights.” The Judicial Learning Center, 2015,

https://judiciallearningcenter.org/your-4th-amendment-rights/ .

Counterclaim Article:

Liptak, Adam. “Supreme Court Says Child’s Rights Violated by Strip Search.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 25 June 2009, www.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/us/politics/26scotus.html .