Can school authorities search personal belongings of students after an infraction?

IN my recent lecture on balancing the right of schools to discipline and child protection of students, for teachers and school administrators held in Clark, questions similar to this were propounded by student discipline officers.

In New Jersey v T.L.O, the US Supreme Court laid down the application of the following search standards in relation to searches conducted in schools: First, was the search justified in its inception? A search is justified when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search would turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or rules of the school.

Second, was the search reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place? A search is reasonable when the measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction.

Case study

A female student was caught smoking in the girls’ restroom by the teacher who demanded to see her purse. The teacher saw a pack of cigarettes inside the purse. As the teacher reached for the cigarettes, she also noticed a packet of rolling paper, and upon further checking of the purse, she saw marijuana, a large sum of money and a card with a list of students’ names owing the student money.

The student was charged administratively in the school and was also charged criminally for selling marijuana. The parents of the student moved to suppress evidence found in her purse contending that it violated her right against unreasonable searches and seizures. Were the parents right?

It was held that a school search “will be permissible in its scope when the measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction.” While students do not lose their constitutional rights upon entering the school, the school setting requires some easing of the restrictions to which searches by public authorities are ordinarily subject. Requiring a search warrant was inappropriate for the school environment.

Whether a search of a student in a school is legal, depends simply on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search. In order to determine the reasonableness of the search, a two step process is required. The first inquiry is whether the action was justified at its inception. The second question is whether the search conducted was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the intrusion in the first place.

Applying this test, the search in this case was not unreasonable. First, the initial search for cigarettes was reasonable. The report that respondent had been smoking warranted a reasonable suspicion that she had cigarettes in her purse, and thus the search was justified despite the fact that the cigarettes, if found, would constitute “mere evidence” of a violation of the no-smoking rule.

Second, the discovery of the rolling papers then gave rise to a reasonable suspicion that respondent was carrying marijuana as well as cigarettes in her purse, and this suspicion justified the further exploration that turned up more evidence of drug-related activities.

The reasonableness standard sought to maintain a balance between a student’s expectation of privacy and a school official’s equally legitimate need to maintain a secure and orderly learning environment. Furthermore, the reasonableness standard ensures that the privacy interests of students will be invaded no more than is necessary to achieve the legitimate goal of maintaining order in the schools.

In imposing this reasonable suspicion standard, the Supreme Court declared that what is reasonable depends on the facts and circumstances in which the search takes place. It was held that a search is justified at its inception when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will produce evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or a school rule.