Student Rights Case Analysis Paper

As Americans we commit reliable expectations to what our skillfuls are, in fact we have a bill of rights to ensure the rights we deserve. In well-nigh cases we consider these rights undeniable further sometimes they are deniable when you are a savant on campus. virtu bothytimes the legal line is non quite drop on rights that are afforded to disciples rather the example line is clear or not. In day to day adult spirit we expect law enforcement and lawyers to enforce our rights correctly that on schoolhouse reasonableness staff members are expected to tell apart the role of enforcer and judge.The 4th Amendment protects Americans from erroneous inquisition and seizure, besides students are not afforded the same right on nigh occasions. It has been established that awaiting backpacks and items of the similar is tolerable on school campus still Safford incorporated School Di stark 1 v. Redding delves into the more complicated flying field of body essayes. At t he age of 13 Savana Redding was called into the slip of her school because she had been implicated in distri andion of all over the counter annoyance killers and prescription pain oral contraceptive pills that were the strength of two Advil.The booster primary(prenominal) and secretary went through Savanas phonograph recording bag and pockets were assayed. After no pills were assemble on Savanas come oner floor of clothing the appurtenant foreland hence had the secretarytake Savana to the school nurses office to search her clothes for pills. After the secretary and the nurse, had Savana clear up her outer clothing, they told her to pull her bra out and shake it, and to pull out the malleable on her belowpants, thus exposing her breasts and pelvic area to some degree.No pills were lay out. (Cornell University right School, 2010) It is eventful to also height out that Savanas parents were not notified until aft(prenominal) the search and the assistant principal had not gotten details of when Savana had been distributing pill or where she kept these pills. Soon after Savana was pulled out of school and the legal legal proceeding began. It was decided by the Ninth traffic circle Court that Savana had indeed had her 4th Amendment right had been violated.The court found that the circumstances did not warrant such an invasive search because the suspected facts pointing to Savana did not indicate that the drugs presented a jeopardy to students or were concealed in her underwear, the assistant principal did not have equal suspicion to warrant extending the search to the point of making Savana pull out her underwear. the secretary and the nurse verbalise that they did not see anything when Savana pulled out her underwear, but a strip search and its quarter Amendment consequences are not defined by who was looking and how much was seen. . Cornell University Law School, 2010) Savana had a clean disciplinary record and the assistant principal h ad not even found out when the supposed pills were in Savanas possession or how many were in her possession. The main problem with this search was that, age the measures may have been considered appropriate, at that place was no reasonable explanation for the extremes that the search went to because there was no proof a student would be hiding a non-dangerous grim in her underwear. The 4th Amendment protects Americans from unreasonable search and seizure, but the school system wholly allows that protection sometimes.Schools are allowed to search backpacks but not strip search students. Some things seem obvious to outside eyes, like the fact that you shouldnt strip search 13 year old children, but when you are in charge of 100s of children sometimes certain things get distorted. The assistant principal in this case was trying to mend an example of Savana by showing how strict the school was on their drug policy, but he went too far. Risking the emotional cost a child might org anisation from something like a strip search is never worth proving a point. sideslip searching may be warranted in a location like a student seeing another student carrying a weapon in their under garments, but in a situation where there is no real danger to other students it is extreme. As adults we expect all of our rights to be given to us but unfortunately adults dont forever feel the need to extend those rights to children. The thought in this case could not have been fairer. Hopefully right infringements like this wint happen to others thanks to Savana stepping forward.ReferencesCornell University Law School.(2010).Legal Information Institute.Retrieved from http//www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-479.ZS.html