The Cartoons Analysis of the cartoon To me the cartoons seem to be dealing with searches and seizures in school According to educationfindlawcom in the case of metal detectors its a type of mass search has been challenged as violation of fourth amendment privileges education fin ID: 795059
Download The PPT/PDF document "Cartoon Analysis #9 By Deni Djukic" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Cartoon Analysis #9
By Deni Djukic
Slide2The Cartoons
Slide3Analysis of the cartoon
To me, the cartoons seem to be dealing with searches and seizures in school.
According to education.findlaw.com, in the case of metal detectors, it’s “a type of mass search has been challenged as violation of fourth amendment privileges.” (education. findlaw.com)
All searches and seizures in schools seem to be a challenge to the fourth amendment of the U.S. constitution.
The fourth amendment states that “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing, the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (billofrightsinstitute.org)
Slide4New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)
In Piscataway high school, a teacher discovered a student named T.L.O and another student smoking in the bathroom. After being sent to the principal’s office, the principal searched through her purse and found cigarettes and marijuana. As a result, she was taken to a police station and a court sentenced to a year’s probation. (
www.infoplease.com
&
www.uscourts.gov
.)
However, “the State Supreme court overturned the decision, stating that T.L.O.’s 4th amendment rights have been violated.” (
www.infoplease.com
)
The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the state’s court decision and “ruled in favor of New Jersey by a 6-3 margin.” (
www.infoplease.com
)
Justice Byron White stated that “the rights of children and adolescents are not the same as those of adults and school officials have a responsibility to maintain the discipline necessary for education.”
(
www.infoplease.com
)
Slide5Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls
In Tecumseh, Oklahoma the school district adopted the “School Activities Drug Policy” which requires all secondary students who are in extracurricular activities to agree to do drug testing. Students of Tecumseh high school Lindsay Earls and David James (with their parents) brought a legal action against the school district. They claimed that “the policy violated the fourth amendment” (www. uscourts.gov &
www.law.cornell.edu
.)
The United States District Court for Western District of Oklahoma disagreed with the students that “the policy violated the fourth amendment and granted summary judgement to the School District.” (
www.law.cornell.edu
.)
However, “The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed, holding that the Policy violated the Fourth Amendment.” (www.law.cornell.edu.)
Slide6Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls
cont.
But the U.S. Supreme Court then reversed the Court of Appeals’ decision based on the grounds of “the nationwide epidemic of drug use, and the evidence of increased drug use in Tecumseh schools, it was entirely reasonable for the School District to enact this particular drug testing policy.” (www.law.cornell.edu.)
Slide7Safford Unified School District v. Redding (2009)
In a junior high school, A male student reported to the principal and assistant principal that he got a prescription pill from a female student named Marissa Glines. The assistant principal
whose
his last name was Wilson brought Marissa in his office for questioning and found drugs and knives in a day planner that she held in her possession. (judicallearningcenter.org and
www.law.cornell.edu
.
)
The student Marissa claimed that she had no prior knowledge of the contents of a day planner and the drugs was from another student named Savana Redding. The assistant principal then brought Savana into his office and showed her the day planner with the contraband. She stated that the day planner was hers but denied owning the drugs and knives (judicallearningcenter.org and
www.law.cornell.edu
.)
Slide8Safford Unified School District v. Redding (2009) cont.
“But, Wilson said that he had a report stating that she was giving pills to fellow students. She denied it and agreed to let him search her belongings.” After Wilson and Helen Romero who was an administrative assistant searched and found nothing illegal in Savana’s backpack, Wilson told Romero to “take Savana to the school nurse’s office” to do further searching which Romano and the school nurse named Peggy Schwallier made Savana do a strip search. Again, nothing was found (
www.law.cornell.edu
.)
Then, after the incident occurred and finding out what happened, Savana’s mother filed a suit against the school district and the three school employees on the grounds of they violated her daughter’s fourth amendment rights by doing a strip search to her (
www.law.cornell.edu
.)
Slide9Safford Unified School District v. Redding (2009) cont.
Wilson, Romero, and Schwallier then claimed qualified immunity and wanted summary judgement, the District Court approved the claims on the grounds of there was no “Fourth Amendment violation” but the Ninth Circuit court reversed the previous court’s decision (there was an fourth amendment violation) and they did not give Wilson summary judgement but granted it to Romero and Schwallier since “they were not independent decisionmakers.” (
www.law.cornell.edu
.)
The U.S. supreme court agreed with the Ninth circuit that there was a “fourth amendment violation” but gave qualified immunity to Wilson, Romero, and Schwallier “because clearly established law did not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment” (
www.law.cornell.edu
.)
Slide10My Opinion
I think searches and seizures (not just metal detectors) are necessary in today’s schools since in today’s society we have issues like school shootings and drugs in schools.
Everyone has a right to the fourth amendment but a person’s right stops if they have the intention of hurting people and hurting society as a whole. Plus, school officials have an “in loco parentis” responsibility to make sure their students are safe from harm.
However, when an search to a student is conducted, it needs to be absolutely necessary and reasonable (for example, in the last case, what assistant principal Wilson ordered his employees to do to Savanna is not right.)
Slide11Sources
Thomson Reuters (2014) School Violence and Weapons: Metal Detectors in Schools. Retrieved from http://education.findlaw.com/school-safety/school-violence-and-weapons-metal-detectors-in-schools.html
Bill of Rights Institute (n.d.) Bill of Rights of the United States of America (1791.) Retrieved from
http://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/bill-of-rights/
New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985.) Retrieved from
http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-informed/supreme-court/landmark-supreme-court-cases-about-students.aspx
&
http://www.infoplease.com/us/supreme-court/cases/ar24.html
Slide12Sources cont.
4. Board of Education of Independent School District #92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls 536 U.S. 822 (2002.) Retrieved from
http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-informed/supreme-court/landmark-supreme-court-cases-about-students.aspx
&
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-332.ZO.html
5. Safford Unified School District v. Redding 531 F. 3d 1071 (2009.) Retrieved from
http://judiciallearningcenter.org/your-4th-amendment-rights/
&
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-479.ZS.html