What Do You Think? The principal is walking down the hall at the end of lunch, hurrying students to class. As he passes the bathroom, he smells marijuana. He stops everyone in the bathroom, brings them to the office and searches each one (pockets, backpacks, etc.). One of the students protests, saying he didn’t do anything and shouldn’t be searched just because he happened to be in the bathroom. The principal says he was in a place where illegal activity was taking place and he has the right to search him. Who is right? Why? The principal is correct. See slide 10.

Students and the 4th Amendment Search and Seizure

What is the 4th Amendment? The 4th amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Point out significant terms such as: persons, houses, papers, effects, unreasonable searches, warrants, probable cause

What Does that Mean?? Basically, it means that in order for a person to be searched or arrested, a warrant must be issued. The warrant must reasonable and supported by probable cause. Under probable cause, the law enforcement officer must have sufficient reason for the warrant.

What Does that Mean? (cont.) The warrant must also be specific to the search. For example: An officer can’t have a warrant to search for weapons, find none, and then decide to search for drugs. “Reasonable cause” is subjective to the case and can’t be specifically defined.

What Does it Mean in Schools? Students do have some 4th amendment rights at school, but they are severely restricted. In loco parentis is often used to justify searches, as well as most other disciplinary actions. Some say that because of in loco parentis, students have no rights and can be searched whenever and however school authorities choose. In loco parentis (in place of parents) – schools have authority over students while in school and while to/from school

What Does it Mean in Schools? (cont.) Others believe that school authorities must have a warrant and probable cause before searching students. The Supreme Court has not definitively ruled one way or the other. In short, the needs of the school to protect everyone and maintain order outweighs student privacy.

Consider This … A student is walking down the hall. The vice principal stops her and asks her where she’s going. As she’s answering, the VP notices she has something in her hand that she is now trying to put in her back pocket. The VP asks what it is and the student answers, “Nothing.” He asks again and the response is the same. He then demands that she empty her pockets and retrieve her backpack for a search. Was the VP right in searching the student? Why or why not? FYI, the VP did not have enough cause to search the student, especially if the student is not breaking a rule, has had no other disciplinary action against her, isn’t known to be involved in illegal activity.

T.L.O. vs. New Jersey The facts of the case: A 14 year old girl (T.L.O.) was suspected of smoking cigarettes in the bathroom with another girl. Both were brought to the assistant principal. T.L.O. denied it; the other girl confessed. The principal searched T.L.O.’s purse and found cigarettes and other evidence of marijuana dealing. T.L.O. sued, claiming her 4th amendment rights were violated since the principal was only searching for cigarettes. The assistant principal found cigarettes next to some rolling papers. He continued the search and found a small amount of marijuana, empty bags, a pipe, a stack of $1 bills, a list of people who appeared to owe her money, and two letters that referred to her dealing marijuana.

T.L.O. vs. New Jersey: The Result The court ruled that T.L.O.’s right had not been violated and the search was justified because she was suspected of breaking school rules. This case established reasonable suspicion and lower standards for search and seizure in schools. Reasonable suspicion means school authorities have good reason to search a student. Reasonable suspicion is a lower standard than probable cause. This case also established that warrants were not necessary in a school search.

The Implication Courts usually favor schools, if schools can prove the search/seizure is necessary to maintain order and safety. Drug testing of students has been upheld by the Supreme Court. Student lockers are not protected since they are school property. Teachers are allowed to conduct searches (although it’s recommended to have an administrator present.) Vernonia vs. Acton (1995) upheld that random drug tests on student athletes was acceptable. Board of Educ. vs. Earls (2002) ruled that drug testing of students involved in any extra-curricular activities was acceptable.

Implications (cont.) If a student consents to a search, anything found can be used against the student. This means a student can end up in trouble for something he/she wasn’t initially being searched for. If the student doesn’t consent, the search must be under reasonable suspicion. For example, an administrator can’t just walk into a classroom and randomly search a student “just because”.

Implications (cont.) If an administrator or teachers sees, hears, or smells anything that indicates a school rule being broken or criminal activity, a search is reasonable. This means … if a student appears under the influence of drugs or alcohol, a further search of the student is reasonable.

One Final Note … If a search is determined to be illegal and violated student’s rights, the results of the search can’t be used against the student in a criminal case. But … The results of the search can still be used against the student in violation of school rules. For example, a teacher thinks a student is cheating on an exam and the administrator makes the student take off his shirt (it’s happened!) to look for cheat sheets, writing, etc. and instead finds a knife in the waistband of his pants. The search is unreasonable so he can’t be criminally liable for the knife, but he can be suspended for breaking a school rule.

What Do You Think? An art teacher gives her students some expensive pens to use for a project. At the end of class, she collects them but notices that 2 are missing. When no one returns them, she holds everyone after class and searches their pockets and backpacks. Is this search reasonable? Why or why not? While the search is probably reasonable, she should have had an administrator come in and conduct the search.