Get your children out of government schools!
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (68)
sorted by:
No clue what case you are talking about. If you find it, please post it here.
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) is still the leading 1A case in schools. It is where the Tinker Test or "substantial disruption" test came from that is still employed.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/393/503
Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986) is another leading 1A case involving profane student speech at school
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/478/675
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) is an interesting case on school officials censoring the student paper.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/484/260
Morse v. Fredrick (2007) is the "Bong hits 4 Jesus" case
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/06-278
New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) is the case that holds 4A applies to searches conducted by school officials and not just police.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/469/325
Safford Unified v. Redding (2009) is about strip searching students. It is a mixed bag of results. On the one hand, it was held the search was unconstitutional. On the other hand, the Court held that qualified immunity applied because:
"Although the strip search violated Savana’s Fourth Amendment rights, petitioners Wilson, Romero, and Schwallier are protected from liability by qualified immunity because “clearly established law [did] not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment ,” Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U. S. ___, ___. The intrusiveness of the strip search here cannot, under T. L. O., be seen as justifiably related to the circumstances, but lower court cases viewing school strip searches differently are numerous enough, with well-reasoned majority and dissenting opinions, to counsel doubt about the clarity with which the right was previously stated."
The idea that any person thought it permissible for school officials to strip search a student is asinine. Or that this was "unsettled" in case law. Ask 1,000 random people whether this was ok, and you might get 2 glue sniffers that said "seems legit..."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-479.ZS.html
J.D.B. v. North Carolina (2011) is not just applicable to schools, but is governing case law on juveniles as it relates to Miranda rights and being "in custody."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/9-11121.ZS.html
Your newest case is 11 years old?
Last year the Supreme court found for this cheerleaders 1st ammendment right.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/23/politics/supreme-court-first-amendment-cheerleader/index.html
I dont have a recent case on 4th ammendment in schools but I find it hard to believe with the way the courts have been ruling the last year that they would uphold 1st and not 4th. But maybe that is the the situation still.
Honestly, I dont understand why schools allow them to have access to phones at during the day.
They just apply the test in Tinker. So ya its more recent, but it is still the Tinker test.
It was a very similar situation if memory serves, the school took someones phone and rummaged through it, suspended or expelled the kid, family sued, court found that because it was a public school and the teachers/school officials involved were paid by the gov, they infringed on the students 4th amendment rights.