Cell Phone Education Regulation Act: A Case Study

Most schools do not allow the use of cell phones in school or in class, so the school feels like changing their policy of cell phone use might be a bad idea. Students could take advantage or miss use the privilege of phones in class. There will always be students who act out in class, but the school must discipline those who do and reward those who do not.

The Fourth Amendment to the constitution protects United States citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. Our forefathers recognized the harm and abuses that occurred in the colonies to innocent people by the British, and they made sure to write protections into the U.S. Constitution. Fearing the police state that any nation has the potential to become and recognizing that freedom and liberty is meaningless when victimization by the police is a real and foreboding threat the Fourth Amendment was created. The Fourth Amendment has gone through many challenges and controversies in the past, and currently the issue of how the Fourth Amendment applies to students in public schools has come to be contended in the courts. While it is

In recent years, schools have been increasingly subjected to weaponry, drugs, and violence. School officials are seeking ways to help maintain a safe environment for their students. The increase of violence has led to many cases of controversy over students’ Fourth Amendment rights. The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires a warrant to be presented and supported by probable cause. The problem with this is that requiring school officials to bring in police and for them to obtain a warrant takes time, time that these people do not have. If there is a threat that a student may possess drugs, the administration of the school needs to take immediate action in order to maintain a safe environment. Schools should be able to take any necessary action in order to keep other students safe, but should also have guidelines they must follow in extreme cases, such as strip searches.

The ruling in my case was the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bridget. They allowed students to meet on school grounds to discuss

“Ultimately, the Supreme Court held 6-3 that the school’s search of T.L.O.’s purse was constitutional.” (Lannacci 2016). This essay will briefly examine the up till today open question that can never really be given a definite answer until applied in each case- “the applicability of the exclusionary rule in juvenile delinquency or criminal proceedings when the evidence has been seized in a school, by a school official, in violation of the Fourth Amendment.” (Stoddard 2011).

In the Supreme Court case “Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 1995,” the question before the court was whether or not “...random drug testing of high school athletes violates the reasonable search and seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment.”(“Vernonia School District.” [Oyez]). The case concerned the Fourth Amendment, which protects a person’s right to privacy and protects them from unreasonable searches and seizures. In this case, a seventh-grade student, James Acton, claimed that the situation regarding a mandatory drug test in his school was an unreasonable search. Without doing the test, he was not allowed to join an athletic team. Although the court case changed its name order, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court trial was the Vernonia

Legal Issues: How does the Fourth Amendment apply to school officials? Did this particular search violate T.L.O’s expectations of the right to privacy that is protected through the Fourth Amendment?

The Supreme Court set a precedent on school searches with the case of New Jersey v. T.L.O. In that particular case, a student was observed smoking in the bathroom of the high school. The student denied smoking and upon search of her belongings by the assistant vice principal, a pack of cigarettes were found along with rolling papers. Since there is a parallel between rolling papers and marijuana, the assistant vice principal decided to further search her purse and found marijuana, empty

Officials as public schools has the authority to search student’s property. These officials are representatives of the state and they do not need to obtain a warrant to search a student’s property. Officers are also protected under the Fourth Amendment when using a trained drug dog to investigate for evidence outside a person’s home. The following landmark cases had an impact on law enforcement.

    The main issue is, is it against the fourth amendment for school officials to conduct search and seizures on students with or without probable cause. This is an issue till this day because there

The Court ruled that it did not violate students' federal or state constitutional rights to be free from unreasonable searches. The Court reasoned that the state, as schoolmaster of children, must exercise a degree of supervision and control greater than it could exercise over adults. They also said that public school children have lesser privacy expectations with regard to medical examinations and procedures than the general population, and student athletes have even less legitimate privacy expectation. The school district had immediate and legitimate concern in preventing student athletes from using drugs.

People all around the world have many electronic devices, and there are abundant amounts of freedom that come with them. There are so many different technologies to choose from, but one that seems to be quite common among people of all ages, are cell phones. Such technology is great for many uses, but it is not always appropriate in certain settings. The principal at my school has adopted a new policy that bans the use of cell phones during school hours. I support my principal’s decision. Cell phones can be distractions in many ways to students during school. They can cause conflicts between fellow students and between students and teachers. Allowing cell phones during school hours also basically gives students permission to not pay

Have you ever heard of the gruesome Columbine High School massacre? This incident occurred on April 20th 1999 and involved two students embarking on a shooting rampage, killing twelve students, a teacher and wounding twenty three others. Unfortunately during this incident, the school 's most easily accessible phone was on the complete other side of the school in the library. Perhaps some of these lives could have been saved if the students in this class had cell phones that they could 've used to contact the authorities more quickly. The issue we are addressing today is the usage of cellular devices in educational facilities. Both Cameron and myself believe that cell phone usage is of extreme convenience, and has academically beneficial

Prior to the landmark ruling by the United States Supreme Court, New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 105 S. Ct. 733, 83 L. Ed. 2d 720 (1985), the clarity on how search and seizures applied to students in public schools were unclear. A particular case from 1969 can shed some light regarding on how the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution defines student rights in public schools. In Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503, 89 S. Ct. 733; 21 L. Ed. 2d 731 (1969), the court found that:

Many places in society are setting policies on digital device. The principal at my school has also set policies on banning cell phones in school. Students should not be permitted to use cell phones in school. Using cell phones during school allows students to cheat. Students will be more distracted by cell phones and pay less attention to the teacher and to the lesson. Students have a higher chance of getting in trouble if they use cell phones in school rather than if they are not allowed to use digital devices in school.