Question

in this assignment, you will read a short synopsis of cases that made their way to the supreme court, identify which amendment from the bill of rights applies, and determine how you would rule if you were a justice reviewing the case
case #1: new jersey v. t.l.o. (1985)
background:
in 1980, at piscataway high school in new jersey, a teacher caught two girls, t.l.o. (a 14 - year - old freshman) and a friend, smoking in a restroom. smoking was strictly prohibited by school rules. the teacher reported them to the schools vice - principal, who then took both girls to his office
upon questioning, t.l.o.s friend admitted to smoking and was subsequently given detention. t.l.o., however, denied the accusation. in response, the vice - principal searched her purse. during this search, he discovered not only cigarettes but also marijuana, a large amount of money, and other items that suggested she was involved in drug dealing.
t.l.o. was later charged with juvenile delinquency for the drug - related offenses. her defense argued that the evidence found in her purse should be dismissed because the search was conducted without a warrant. terry said that searching her purse violated her constitutional right to protection against \unreasonable searches and seizures\
the trial court rejected this argument, deciding that a school could search a student if
easonable suspicion that a crime has been or is in the process of being committed, or reasonable cause to believe that the search is necessary to maintain school discipline or enforce school policies.\ terry was found guilty of drug possession at trial.
t.l.o. appealed this case to the new jersey supreme court, which reversed the trial courts decision and found that the evidence was obtained during an unconstitutional search. the state of new jersey asked the u.s. supreme court to hear the case, and the court agreed to do so

1. which amendment from the bill of rights might apply to this case? choose 1
2. why did you choose this amendment/right for this case?
3. were t.l.o.s rights violated? choose 1
4. how would you rule on this case if you were a justice on the supreme court?

in favor of the student or her school? explain how your decision relates to the amendment you chose.

Explanation:

1. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. In this case, the search of T.L.O.'s purse is at issue.
2. The Fourth Amendment is relevant because it governs searches. The school official searched T.L.O.'s purse. The key is whether the search was reasonable.
3. The Supreme Court in the actual New Jersey v. T.L.O. case (1985) held that school officials' searches of students are governed by the Fourth Amendment. The Court said searches must be reasonable - having a reasonable ground for suspecting the search will turn up evidence of misconduct (here, smoking, which was against school rules) and the search's scope should be reasonably related to the objectives (checking for cigarettes, but then finding more). So, depending on perspective - if following the actual ruling, the initial search (for cigarettes) was reasonable (so rights not violated in that sense for the initial part, but the discovery of drugs - the Court said school searches are of a lower standard than police searches. But if just looking at the "unreasonable searches" aspect of the Fourth Amendment claim.
4. If ruling as a Justice: If following the actual Supreme Court decision (New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985)), the Court held that the search was reasonable. The school official had reasonable suspicion (smoking violation) to search the purse (where cigarettes could be). Once the cigarettes were found (which related to the initial suspicion), but the discovery of drugs - the Court said school searches are "reasonableness" - based (not requiring a warrant like police searches). So the search was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment (as applied to schools in a special context). So rule in favor of the school. Because the Fourth Amendment's "unreasonable searches" clause, when applied to schools, allows for searches with reasonable suspicion (not probable cause like police). The vice - principal had reasonable suspicion (smoking) to search the purse (a place cigarettes could be).

Answer:

1. The Fourth Amendment.
2. Because the case involves a search (of T.L.O.'s purse), and the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
3. No (if following the actual Supreme Court's reasoning that the search was reasonable under the special school - search context of the Fourth Amendment).
4. In favor of the school. The Fourth Amendment's requirement of reasonableness, when applied to schools, allows for searches based on reasonable suspicion (not the higher police - search standard of probable cause). The vice - principal had reasonable suspicion (smoking violation) to search T.L.O.'s purse (a logical place to find cigarettes). So the search was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment as interpreted for school settings.