New Jersey Vs. TLO Case

Dress codes violate the first amendment. Students should have the ability to express themselves as it is their right to do so, but schools are prohibiting them from being able to express themselves. In the article Are Student Dress Codes a Violation of Civil Rights, Yates Kimberly claims, “If a school district can show that political

A. Rule: The court case of T.L.O. also establishes a more compassionate standard of what they review as a “reasonable suspicion”, in what goes on to determine whether or not the lawfulness of the search was in the school policy or follows district policy too. To lead reasonable suspicion can sum up and equalized,when it leans toward a lessen of any chance of finding evidence of wrongful behavior in a student or individual. Of all the information Wilson acquired from the Faculty and other questionable sources from students, Marissa’s statement of the pills came from Savannah that lead was sufficient in justification of a search upon Savannah’s backpack. In addition the Savannah’s outer clothing. Savannah reasoning could be possibly was reckoning of carrying the tylenol. The disgraceful strip search and seizure that ultimately exposed her private areas to some degree.The content of this belief failed to match the degree of intrusiveness she was getting from the school. Nothing was led to suggested the amount and quantity of the drugs, could appeal to pose a real danger to any of the students or to that of Savannah in carrying pills in her underwear or in bra.School officials are allowed and can search any students belongings and lockers. They are entitled to qualified immunity where it clearly states and establishes as qualified immunity and established

Due to the student’s suspensions, father’s of students sued Des Moines Independent Community School District. Initially the case was filed in District Court which dismissed the complaint and upheld the schools’ authority to enforce the policy because a fear of a school disturbance would result from the armband protest. The case was then brought to the Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit, which considered the case en banc. where the court was divided equally the case was granted certiorari. On

Arguments between New Jersey and TLO continued. For New Jersey their statement upon appeal is brought up opinionated that school officials act for the parents of students. Like parents, they do not need a warrant to make searches or seize evidence. School officials also must have broad powers to control student conduct, including the powers of search and seizure. "TLO's behavior furnished a reasonable basis for the search of her purse; therefore, the exclusionary rule does not

Students don't have the same First Amendment rights they have in the public compared to school. Four major cases were brought to the Supreme Court concerning students' First Amendment, Tinker , Fraser, Hazelwood, and Morse. The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Only one ruled in favor of the student that being the first one, Tinker which set the stage for the rest. Students' First Amendment rights have changed since Tinker expanded upon students' right to being constricted because

T.L.O. case “...school officials do not have to meet the same standards as police officers when conducting searches” (New Jersey v. T.L.O.). The T.L.O. case was just one of the cases concerning schools and there were many others, including the Safford Unified School District v. Redding case. This case specifically concerned searching for drugs in schools. The Court ruled in this case, “...no indication of danger to the students from the power of the drugs or their quantity or any reason to suppose that Savana was carrying these pills in her underwear. Given these deficiencies, we conclude that the search was unreasonable. T.L.O. directed school officials to limit the intrusiveness of a search in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction” (Safford Unified School District v. Redding). Basically, if there is no disturbance in the school day, then there should be a search procedure with a warrant. However, if there is a disturbance in the school day, the school should not be required to get a search

Unlike the Tinker case, where the student dealt with public policy, the Fraser case (1986) dealt with vulgar speech at school that did not meet educational values, hence, the court ruled in favor of the school to prohibit such disrespectful behavior and to limit 1st Amendment rights of students. However, the court noted that if Fraser gave that speech outside of school, he would be protected. Even though initially the State Supreme Court ruled that Fraser’s 1st Amendment rights were violated, the US Supreme Court overturned that decision because the court felt there should be some limitations to students’ free speech at school and they do not hold the same liberties as adults. Moreover, this ruling

This case was in the year of 2004. The court case was when a male student reported that a another female student gave him a prescription-strength ibuprofen pill. They searched the student bag. The search revealed more pills and some weapons. Then she reported that it all belonged to Savana Redding's and that she gave her the pills. Savana was also searched. They searched not only her bookbag and pockets, but also inside her undergarments. Then she sued the school for strip searching her without any proof to search her, which lead to this case.

When schools search lockers and students without probable cause they become vulnerable to many legal issues.

Although the First Amendment protects citizens in many ways, there are some exceptions to these protected rights. A conflict arose in the Morse v. Frederick court case in 2007, when a student was seen with a banner promoting drug use at a school event. Deborah Morse, the principal, took the banner from the student and suspended the student from school. The student, Joseph Frederick, believed that the school violated his right to free speech. When the case was settled, it was decided that the students rights were not violated by the school (“Facts”). The court decided that “ Schools can regulate speech that conflicts with school anti-drug policies, or similar school policies, even if the speech doesn’t directly disrupt the educational process, such as at a school-sponsored event” (“Your 1st”). Although the First Amendment is the most important when it comes to civil rights, this case demonstrates that the protections guaranteed by the Bill of Rights are not

Depending on who you are and what you're viewpoints are this case is very controversial, That being said, it's a perfect case to look into. A student by the name of Matthew N. Fraser was suspended from school for three days. This was because he delivered a “provocative or obscene” speech to his fellow classmates. The student saw this as a issue or a violation of his right to freedom of speech. He was speaking at a public assembly when his peers and teachers saw that his words were indecent and unnecessary. So he decided to take this to the supreme court and when this happens the Court had ruled that this was not in violation of his rights so he was suspended for three days. Yes he did take this case to the Court but he was not able to win

America’s Founding Fathers gave Americans certain rights when they established this great nation. These rights include life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as well as other constitutional rights like freedom of religion, protection against self-incrimination, and the right to bear arms in defense. One of the most important of the freedoms bestowed upon American citizens by their inspired founding fathers is the freedom of speech. Americans have the right to speak their minds without the worry of punishment by the government. An example of this is the Tinker V. Des Moines Independent Community School District case in the years 1968-1969. In this Supreme Court case, the Tinker family was fighting for their right to symbolic speech at school. Another case regarding Freedom of Speech at a school is Hazelwood School District V. Kuhlmeier. This case is also concerning the right to free speech at school. Free speech in school greatly affects many people. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, “In fall 2016, about 50.4 million students will attend public elementary and secondary schools… In fall 2016, some 20.5 million students are expected to attend American colleges and universities” (A-Z). This means that these laws and related issues will affect about 70 million people.

In this Supreme Court case there was an issue of the ability of a school official to control the amount of non-violent speech from students. The big question was can school officials choose the speech that students are allowed to participate in without showing reasoning of a disruptions and/or stress on the educational environment. The facts of the case were that students in this school system wanted to wear black armbands as a protest to the United States involvement in the Vietnam War. Also the bands represent mourning for the deaths caused by the Vietnam War. Even though the school stated that students were not allowed to wear said armbands the students still wore them. These students were then suspended leading to the court case (First,

Many students believe that they have unlimited rights, however this isn’t true. In school settings, school policies can limit the rights of the students to make a safer and more orderly learning environment. These policies don’t completely take away the rights, they merely limit these rights, even if students feel differently. These are some examples of limited rights in school systems.

Chapter Eight overviews the freedom of student speech and expression on public school property. The First Amendment provides students with the ability to openly speech and express themselves; however, there are limitations to these rights. Schools must balance the students right to free speech and expression with the need for a safe school that is advantageous for learning. As teachers and administrators, it is important to recognize that freedom of speech and expression is not strictly defined to the spoken word. Students are afforded the freedom to express themselves in what they wear, the style of their hair, etc. So long as this expression does not infringe on the school’s ability to educate the students.