The Invasion Of Privacy In Public Schools

Such actions that may violate a student’s constitutional rights as a citizen would be an administrator or school law enforcement searching a student or their personal belongings for unjustified reasons while in school. The boundaries of the fourth amendment are very complicated when dealing with the rights of students being that the school systems have

. In Pros and Cons of School Locker Searches, it states that, " Misplaced Focus: searching lockers can imply to students that they aren't trustworthy. It can ruin the school's attempt to build school community trust and respect." In Article 3 ( Pros and Cons of School Locker Searches- Synonym), it states, " School locker searches also consume valuable time for administrators, security guards, and teacher who conduct them. Student also lose their learning time because of this issue." In addition, Article 3 states, " Because students may keep personal items in their lockers, such as photographs and personal letters, even a search with the best intentions can appear to be a major breach of trust by teachers and administrators, causing a rift between the student body and faculty." Some people may argue that locker searches can keep children safe. It "protects them." But how can locker searches protect the children unless they think something's up. If the children act normal and they have a gun in their backpack, then how does this help keep them safe- if no one's suspicious of

Where as others may believe that this will make the school system more of a bureaucracy. Further more those would also argue that most of the time lockers are hardly involved in the keeping of contrabands. If students have contraband items they are more likely to keep it on them and therefore randomly searching lockers it not as important. The time and energy which would be spent searching lockers could be used in more efficient way.

Students have rights just like everyone else, even if they are in a school environment. It can be humiliating and dangerous to a student's well-being to have their property searched and violated. Some students are even willing to sue if they feel they were unjustly searched. Dear faculty of high schools across America I implore you to think before you decide to search through and violate a student's cell phone; I believe that this practice is harming students.

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.

In the case New Jersey v. T.L.O., the student’s purse was searched after the principal had reasonable suspicion that she had cigarettes in her purse since she was caught smoking in the bathroom. The court decision in this case concluded that teachers are acting as agents for the state and are therefore allowed to search if they have reasonable suspicion. Students do have the Fourth Amendment right as all people in America have. However, student’s expectation of privacy has to be balanced with the needs of the school to maintain the educational environment. Schools do not have to obtain a warrant to search, but must have reasonable suspicion in order to search a student’s person or property.

On account of lockers being the school’s property it is legal for them to search them at any time under the right circumstances.

In conclusion, even though there are many different pros and cons about searching school lockers humans today need to search them if need when needed.Although school locker searches can be bad in some legal

There is a serious sociological advantage that comes with the searching of school property. First, these searches will immediately improve the atmosphere of the school, turning it into a drug, alcohol, or weapon free zone. It’s a fact that students perform better in a safe environment and if said hazards are removed from school grounds, there will be a noticeable improvement among students. The removal of these hazards will also improve the community in which the school and students reside in. Say you live in a town like Fargo,

The reason is schools should be able to search students belongings to make sure they do not contain contraband items such as marijuana, guns, knives ,...etc. But schools should never have the right to search your person even if you are carrying contraband because schools should not have enough jurisdiction. School officials should have to call law enforcement to the school to conduct a proper search on a student that is believed to be carrying contraband. Schools just want a safe environment for teaching and learning so that student can know that they are safe in school and not have to worry about getting in harm's

The intent of the Fourth Amendment is to guarantee security against unreasonable governmental searches. Because school officials are actually

Now addressing the complete disrespect and breach of privacy when it comes to school lockers. Lockers aren’t ever really safe, it’s true. If wanted/required a security guard can easily unlock your locker at any point in time during a school day. And you might be thinking: “Okay? So what, they’re just kids” well newsflash, kids have rights too. K-12, the upper echelons of the education system sometimes out right accuse these poor students of harboring drugs and other unlawful paraphernalia within their lockers, and takes upon themselves to undergo what they call “a locker search”, or in other words. “Breach of privacy example number 3”.

Ever since the first school shooting, a lot of people have changed their beliefs on this subject. I was in eighth grade when the shooting at Columbine High School took place. Before that shooting, I never would have considered something like that happening. Now, it is seventeen years later and school shootings almost seem like an everyday thing. That is sad, but it is true. This is why I believe a student should not have a high expectation of privacy while at school. The law used to be more lenient, but these circumstances have changed that. Right after Columbine, a lot of states had a zero tolerance law. According to the Center for Public Education site, this law said that if a student was caught with contraband they were given a strict punishment, no matter what the circumstance was. The laws have changed some over the last few years, and are not quite as strict as that. The schools still have to ensure that every student is safe, though. It is common for schools to have metal detectors or bring in dogs on a regular basis. Once they have a reason to suspect a student, they have the right to search their belongings. I believe this is well within their rights as administrators who are trying to protect the school as a whole. I realize that students may feel violated, I have been there. It was always an inconvenience to have to sit outside the hallways while the dogs searched each room. I never felt like it was wrong when they did find something though. So many students would bring large amounts of drugs, guns and knives to school. If it weren’t for the measures that the school took they would just be walking around with these items. I hope these laws never change, and my kids have the same protection that I did. I would hate to imagine my child going to school with guns and drugs within an arm’s reach. I believe the issue of student’s privacy is one that many people can agree with each other on.

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:

Some claim that they are the school property and if something is going on then they should be able to conduct a search, but the schools did give the students the lockers to keep there stuff safe, on the impretion that the schools can’t shereach them.So schools shouldn’t be allowed to conduct random searches of students privat items.