Sides split when it comes to school privacy
29 Comments Published by clay January 4th, 2009 in U.S. Politics.4th Amendment and Schools The question that comes to mind when I read this article is what is considered a reasonable or unreasonable search. The Supreme Court case that is considered the cornerstone to answering this question is New Jersey v. TLO. Do you agree with the decision? Why or why not? Click here for the decision!
I believe that the principle and courts made the right decision in this case. The 4th amendment says that the state should honor someones privacy. But T.L.O should not have brought her own privacy into the school, where she knew that smoking and drugs were not allowed. What T.L.O does outside of school is considered her own business, but bringing drugs into school and other kids lives crosses the line. This is what causes the clause in the case. Since she was caught smoking on campus the principle had “probable cause” to search her. Of course she would think it was unfair to be searched, but she deserved it because she was disobeying the law in multiple ways.
I agree with the decision made by the vice principal and that of the courts. T.L.O’s rights were not violated, she was on school property and she was an adolescent. If school officials have to get a warrant for every student they suspect students will be able to get away with anything. T.L.O broke school rules, and by doing that she put other students life in danger.
This is a hard topic to make a definite decision on. I can see both sides of the argument, but i believe that i lean more towards siding with the state. Although i support personal rights and freedoms for students, as young adults, i have to agree that there are times when it is crucial that school officials are allowed to search and seize. In this case with T.L.O, she was crossing the boundary of substance abuse at school, not to mention dealing marajuana to fellow students. What you do in your own life is your own business, but i do not think that drugs are healthy for a person in any way and that they should definitly be prevented from becoming familiar on school campuses. Knowing that drugs are illegal, it seems like a pretty stupid idea to go smoke in the girls bathroom which is a PUBLIC place. smoke in a confined area where there are several hundred other students and teachers present, someone is going to find out. it was a pretty stupid idea to begin with.
But what if it was something more serious that a student had, like a knife or gun? Just because the object is more dangerous doesn’t mean that it automatically boosts from “reasonable cause” to “probable cause”. and that’s why i think it is necessary to allow backpacks, purses, lockers, pockets, anything, to be searched. you never know when a situation might come up where it is crucial that schools are allowed to make searches based on reasonable cause. the minor might be at danger of harming him/herself or other students, and that is exactly what everyone wants to avoid. If students don’t want to be caught with drugs or alcohol or weapons, then they need to be smart enough to not bring them to school.
According to the link for the school in Ohio- Some people argue that there is a “lesser expectation of privacy” in the school and that the school setting requires an easing of constitutional restrictions so that teachers can maintain order and discipline without resorting to law enforcement.
Now shouldn’t we all be treated with the same amount of respect regardless of sex, age, ECT? Why is it that at this time, the U.S. Supreme Court and the Ohio Supreme Court take the view that there is a reduced right to privacy in the schoolhouse.
One of the major events that cause uneasiness is the canine searches. “Believe it or not, the courts have held that a “sniff” by a police canine is not a search and this is not subject to constitutional privacy safeguards. This means no warrant is required for a drug dog to be used. In fact, reasonable suspicion is not required. The rule applies to both minors and adults. So the answer to your question is the officers do not need to have probable cause to have a dog sniff the lockers. School officials are free to invite law enforcement to perform this type of search in the schools.” I think that is just a way for officials to get there own way in a quick manor. If they state that a sniff dog can search their belongings without a warrant or a suspicion that is not going to sit well with very many people. That is just like the government, making ways for them to get their way without anyone getting in theirs!
According to –American Civil Liberty Union of Pennsylvania
STUDENT’S PRIVACY RIGHTS AND SCHOOL SECURITY
It was stated that “Ordinarily, a search by police requires the advance written permission of a judge (called a “warrant”), and must be based on probable cause. But school officials are not police, and the courts have said that students in public schools can be searched by school officials without a judicial warrant and even if the school official does not have probable cause, but only a reasonable suspicion that the search will produce evidence of a crime or a violation of school rules. Overall, students have fewer privacy rights in school than outside school. Courts balance your privacy rights against the school’s interest in safety and student discipline. Today, the growing concern about drugs and violence in schools often trumps students’ privacy rights.”
I do think that students should have some sort of privacy in school, but from the statement from the cite above proves to show that privacy is no concern to them. I think that students may come to feel uneasy about the thought of random checks or searches. This can also cause social unrest between not only students and school official, but parents and others as well. There should be a common ground between students and officials. There needs to be a clear statement and agreement so people don’t feel that they are being violated.
Oh mannn!
This was my bill for MA.
Overturned it???????????????????
They didnt violate anything!!!!!!!!
If you caught a student smoking weed, it would only be logical for you to look through their stuff to find MORE weed. If not, then they’ll just go back home and smoke some more. Even worse, offer it to friends or sell it to more people.
Lets say instead of drugs, they found a GUN or something crazy in TLO’s purse. If the school hadnt looked through her stuff, there may have been something dangerous that wouldve happened. TLO may have shot up the school and killed 10 people. All of this would have been prevented if her bag was searched.
I believe that schools do have the right to check bags and lockers. They have the right to use search dogs too. They dont need any reason. Its only doing them good. Otherwise, students can get away with anything.
Additionally, I would totally support the search with adults too. Maybe there wouldnt be so many crimes…
I believe that the principal and the New Jersey courts did the right thing in TLO’s case. I think that school officials should have the right to search any of the student’s belongings. Not just for that student’s safety but for all the other students. When you are at school, the teachers are like your parents and if they want to search your things then they should be able too. I don’t see anything wrong with what the school officials did, in the first place you shouldn’t be bringing anything inappropriate to school, so there is not really anything to worry about. In the case of the 4th Amendment being broken, I don’t think so because TLO was on school property and she was with her friend who was smoking so that’s more than a reason why you should search her things. Also, the 4th amendment talks about honouring people’s privacy and just like Cat said TLO should not have brought her privacy to school. I am also glad that this case did not win in court because if the courts had favoured in TLO’s case then I believe it would have given teenagers more confidence of sneaking inappropriate things around.
This is really a hard decision. 4th amendment was settled to protect citizen’s privacy. but do students have the same right under the 4th amendment as adult? I believe the principal and the school did the right thing in TLO’s case. They search TLO’s purse because they found her and another smoking in the nonsmoke area. That is a reasonable suspicion. 4th amendment states that “right to be free from UNREASONABLE searches and seizures” in the schoolhouse setting. so I dont think the 4th amendment was violated in this case. Imagine if they didnt search through TLO’s purse, they wouldnt know the girl is dealing with a trade involved in marijuana. She might be selling more cigarettes.
In a public place like school, everything will be taken seriously if it is suspicious. because it affects every other people. I think that is why the 4th amendment is “right to be free from UNREASONABLE searches and seizures”.
The vice principal and the courts were right. TLO doing drugs is her own business , but not when it is inside the school. Schools are supposed to be an institution of learning curriculum that has been approved. I’m not sure substance abuse was on the approved curriculum. Also think about the parents. They send their underage kids to school only after years of researching different schools and their areas. For someone to bring drugs into a school is violating the parents trust in that school. TLO endangered other kids. In different drugs there are different things, one of those few students could have been allergic to something in the drug.
I would agree with the decision of the court because it’s true that the school is responsible of students and they are KINDA of in a way our parents. By them being responsible watching over us (as much of us don’t like it) because if they don’t they get sued by the real parents. I think it should apply only if there is suspicion that its going to harm a lot of students. In T.L.O cased if she denied that she was smoking and someone saw her or there was evident, then that should be enough for a search. If in other cases there is only like about less than 30% suspicion about something harmful then there should be no search.
~j.p.
_________________________________________________
By nature all men are alike but by education become different— old proverb.
well according to the article Lawyer Mark says that random searches have been defined by the courts. He says that a search of a persons bag and locker needs to be backed by a warrant. But the police officers don’t need warrants for doing such things in a school. Also according to Lawyer Mark Canine searches is not a search and that it is to subjected to the constitution privacy safeguard. I can say that i understand this point of the canine issue. To tell the truth i have a bit of fear of dogs. I don’t trust the dogs. There is a old saying that dog that doesn’t bark, bites. I wouldn’t like to be sniffed by a dog but, the police conduct these searches for the good of the community. There job is to provide a sense of protection to the people, so they search for people who might have dangerous substances.
I dont agree with this searching they speak of.
I say they should at least give a 2 day notice that random strangers with hungry dogs are going to be going through our personal belongings.
many students look at school as a safe place with out commanding officers and faculty looking down upon us as thoe we are criminals and need to be searched because we cannot be trusted. i say that school should be a safe place free of principals that are afraid of their students doing drugs, if thats the case then the school should set up an orientation and talk about this issue before they lavish their random searches that invade our youthful privacy.
NO, i do not think that the victoms rights were violated. T.lo was not supposed to bring her persional things to the public. If t.lo would have kept her drugs at home then she wouldnt have this problem but she didnt so she put her self in the situation that she is in. she shouldnt have brought the drugs to school end of discussion. no her 4th amendment rights where not violated!
no i dont believe t.lo’s rights were violated. she was on school property which makes it their business to search someone especially if it can put others in danger. i think that she put herself in this situation the moment she brought the drugs too school. the schools have a right to conduct these random searches. & i dont think that students should get notices of these searches which is why theyre called random. yes they do go through your personal belongings which is a problem or something that people could complain about but i see it has if they have nothing to hide then they shouldnt complain. i think its stupid how kids bring drugs to school thats not what school is for& for that reason the schools have right to search who ever they want as long as theyre on school grounds. no i do not believe t.lo’s $th amendment rights were violated.
Just like Ttiffeny said yes this was part of my bill. I told them it was not illegal. oh well. I was actually surprised that the courts decided that a ‘sniff’ from a police canine was not considered a search. What would it be considered then? what else would the police use the dogs for but SEARCHING and finding drugs that are hidden. It is high school though so no one cares right. Take a few constitutional rights away from high schoolers its not like they know about the 4th amendment. I think that its for the good of a the high school environment but they just found a loop hole. We should all just get used to the fact that we have no real privacy.
The stupid kids rights were not violated. She shouldn’t be dealing in the school in the first place. If youre going to do something like that might as well do it outside out school somewhere safe. If you’re stupid enough to do it in school and then stupid enough to be caught then you deserve to get in trouble.
Having dogs come and search is a good idea because it stops kids from doing stupid things like this. It makes it harder for kids to deal in schools since random searches are being done. If they dont deal in school, maybe some kids will figure it is too much work to get what they want so it might stop them. Id say the schools have the right to search whatever they want to as long as they arent being disrespectful to the students. Bringing a sniffing dog that is trained to look for certain things is no crime against the 4th amendment.
An unreasonable search in my opinion would be going through students lockers and pulling everything out. The dog is fine because if the dog does sniff something there probably is some kind of drug there and it should be searched just in case. If schools don’t act as the “Parent” then kids will think they can do what ever they want. Discipline needs to be taught a lot more in schools because kids are definitely becoming more rowdy. Kids should find something better to do when they are in school. Outside of school they can do whatever they want with their lives and do drugs, it’s their choice. But doing it in school, kids are more likely to join in because its there and they want to fit in. The student is trying to justify their act by saying things like this is against my constitutional rights. Even though it technically may be, it shouldn’t matter because you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place somewhere where it isn’t allowed. People should be put in jail for just being so stupid.
Plain and simple if you don’t want to get caught don’t bring it to school. Its your choice to do so and if you do, you should deal with the consequences.
Of course TLO would think her rights were being violated, but her bad idea to bring drugs onto her school campus … that’s just stupid.
This was a bill on model assembly, and it didn’t pass, which in my opinion is sooo dumb. Any student who brings drugs onto campus should be searched, yeah it is their own life to smoke or do drugs, but not at school. This is a bit silly. I’m really not even sure how to respond to this blog because I can’t believe this is even a legitimate case.
There was probable cause to search TLO. End of story.
I do not think this is a violation of Amendment 4.
If the school tried to search her home or anything without a warrant, then okay, but this isn’t the case.
Thank you and good day.
I believe the decision of the court is the right way to go. It’s true, there not invading your privacy because they are using stuff so they can find stuff without looking inside. I find that it is okay to have dog sniffers and metal detectors because it creates a safety around the school, where weapons and drugs don’t belong. If you take it to school it is on you, since its usually government property, hence it’s run by the government. Although, I don’t agree with opening backpacks without proofs, unless using a dog which believes it found something. If a police just comes and opens a backpack, I do believe that is violation of privacy. There is no reason to check the backpacks if the dogs and metal detectors don’t find anything, especially without a warrant.
I think that as long as there is a reasonable cause for searching some one then it is okay for the administration to proceed. However I think the reasons for conducting searches must be outlined and decided on prior to the school year so that no one administrator can decide what is enough to intrude someone’s privacy. So yes i think that it is fair.
I say the principal is not guilty. If they have a reason to search someone the smell of smoke coming from the bathroom should be good enough, and look what happened she admitted to selling marijuana at school. In middle school they tricked all the boys to going into the gym for a special treatment and ended up searching us all for anything we can graffiti with. i thought it was a reasonable search because there was lots of tagging at the school and i doubt it was any of the girls. if they’re upset they were unrightfully searched and got caught with something them maybe they shouldn’t have had something they weren’t supposed to in the first place.
I agree with the courts because its the way to go to keep schools safe. Because in many schools students bring guns, knifes ,weapons or even drugs. So i think cops and other people with authority should have the right to search anyone they want in a school zone. I disagree with the kid that got mad because they search his back pack with out permission. That is because he has to remember that he is in a private property. I agree with with the medal detectors and sniffing dogs because that just might makes it easier to find things. And i do not believe that searching back packs is a violation of privacy.
i Belive that the school’s decision was fair, because she decided to bring her business into the school. As for something like random drug testing, i would say that would be unfair, because as long as the student does not bring illegal drugs into the school, they should be able to do whatever they like on their free time, and it shouldnt be the schools problem.
To me, the principal was not in the wrote. They had smelled weed in the bathroom, so they a valid reason to search for paraphernalia. It it turns out that she was dealing drugs, so it proves that they searched her for a reason. Im sure that schools can search a handful of students and catch maybe one person with drugs, but thats a 1 in 20 ratio… they searched her because of the smell in the girls bathroom, and caught her. I believe that searching someone for stuff for a valid reason is completely okay.
^ that was me..ronny carbone. mybad.
To me, the principal was not in the wrote. They had smelled weed in the bathroom, so they a valid reason to search for paraphernalia. It it turns out that she was dealing drugs, so it proves that they searched her for a reason. Im sure that schools can search a handful of students and catch maybe one person with drugs, but thats a 1 in 20 ratio… they searched her because of the smell in the girls bathroom, and caught her. I believe that searching someone for stuff for a valid reason is completely okay.
I think these random security checks that the laws has are good for the schools. And in the article they were talking about k-9s that came into the schools and began sniffing lockers. I actually think thas a good idea. i mean if the students dont have anything in their locker but books then they should not have a problem with it. Because in most public schools there will always be that problem where students bring drugs and sell them. And if there was a k-9 to stop that, then this use of drugs will be reduced. And as for the law coming into schools and checking bag packs and all that, that as well is not such a bad thing. if they have a reason to do what they are doing then it is okay. metal detectors are very effective as well, because sometimes students will bring guns and knifes. with these metal detectors then it will be difficult for them to be coming up with guns in the school.
The security checks are good in my opinion cuz kids wouldnt bring stuff to school that are illegal. Also having k-9′s to sniff out drugs are also good cuz people in many schools have lockers and kids hide stuff in them thinking they are safe but if dogs were brought in then they would be clean in schools of course and teachers would if someone was to have stuff in their lockers then they would get caught and would pay the consequences. The checking backpacks is good as well cuz people also hide things in their bags and not only lockers like weapons and drugs so it would be good to have these things be part of schools.
I dont believe that T.L.O’s rights were violated, because speaking from just a legal perspective, it doesn’t matter whether the police need a search warrent or not in order to search your belongings, because if you think about, if the officer has probable cause, which is something that essentially means if they see something or smell something or even hear something suspicious, then they have a legal obligation to investigate what the thing in question is. If officers couldn’t have that right, then technically speaking an officer who pulls over a murderer and hears strange bangings and noise from the trunk has no way of search that car without a warrent, and that noise could potentially be a dying person. So in order to live with the freedoms that we have today we need to live within a government that allows just a little invasion of privacy, after all the slight loss of the right of privacy is worth it, for all of the freedoms we gain.
honestly i don’t ‘believe there is anything wrong with the current school privacy settings. Children need to checked if needed, because remember, they are children. Some can and maybe be influenced with drugs, and 1 bad seed can ruin the rest. Although id do believe there is a such ting as “crossing the line” if we do more than whats expected now, there will be no doubt attitude received from the students. They just might not get with the program. Hopefully things do turn out right, i honestly believe they will
I personally believe that students should be protected under the fourth amendment, but only to a certain extent. I think school officials should have reasonable evidence to search a students personal things. At my cousin’s school in Texas when the school officials would get a tip that someone had something illegal on campus or something the security would come with their dogs and everyone in the class that that student was in [and sometimes the whole school] would have to line up outside in the hallway and the security would dump everything out of their backpacks onto the floor and have the dogs try to smell out whatever they were looking for. I don’t believe that is right. They’re taking away learning time to dump everyone stuff on the ground because someone who might be in that class might have something that is not allowed at school. Their system is far from perfect. Having all the students have their privacy invaded for what one student might have done is not right. I’m not saying that the school should never be allowed to search a students belongings, I’m just saying students need some right to privacy too.
i think it absolutely ridicules that a student fought for “privacy protection”. if you on school grounds, of course you are subject to whatever the administration tels you with in reason that they are not asking you to harm yourself or someone else. they are responsible for you while your parents arnt there. if they think something is wrong of course they have the right to search whatever they please. however that doesn’t meant they do ridiculous checks everyday. it must be balanced. (“The school setting,” White wrote, “…requires some modification of the level of suspicion of illicit activity needed to justify a search.”) well if i was caught in the bathroom smoking, i would say thats suspicious enough to do a search.especially if it was initially for cigarettes. the marijuana was an addition to what was searched for. when your on school grounds, your supervisors and caretakers are the school faculty and staff, they must do whatever they can to keep all the students safe.