Thread: Do students (minors) forfeit constitutional rights to attend public schools

A 7th grade girl is stripped to her underwear and searched by school administrators. School officials suspected her of giving presicription strength ibuprofin to another student.

I realize prescription drugs can be dangerous if mis-used.
I also believe it is common sense that middle school children should not be sharing prescription drugs, even ibuprofin without parental permission. That said, 7th grade is around the age girls enter puberty and I believe Ibuprofin is a common remedy for severe cramps. It's not as if it is a drug with side effects sought by those wishing to achieve some kind of "high".

This seems like a huge lapse of judgement by school officials. It also seems like simple respect for parental authority could have delegated this to the parents handle, especially as this was predicated by suspicion. Couldn't this have been handled more sensitively? This sounds like more abuse of power related to our failed War on Drugs where zero tolerance has been adopted along with zero intelligence and common sense.

The young lady sued that her constitutional rights were violated and Initially federal courts ruled the "school officials' actions violated common sense and basic human decency". That seems about right to me, but the supreme court has granted a review of the case.

It makes me nervous when we begin to question or even fear those who are supposedly trusted guardians of society. I would be furious if they treated my daughter this way and would be pressing for sexual assault.

Originally Posted by kshRox01

A 7th grade girl is stripped to her underwear and searched by school administrators. School officials suspected her of giving presicription strength ibuprofin to another student.

I realize prescription drugs can be dangerous if mis-used.
I also believe it is common sense that middle school children should not be sharing prescription drugs, even ibuprofin without parental permission. That said, 7th grade is around the age girls enter puberty and I believe Ibuprofin is a common remedy for severe cramps. It's not as if it is a drug with side effects sought by those wishing to achieve some kind of "high".

This seems like a huge lapse of judgement by school officials. It also seems like simple respect for parental authority could have delegated this to the parents handle, especially as this was predicated by suspicion. Couldn't this have been handled more sensitively? This sounds like more abuse of power related to our failed War on Drugs where zero tolerance has been adopted along with zero intelligence and common sense.

The young lady sued that her constitutional rights were violated and Initially federal courts ruled the "school officials' actions violated common sense and basic human decency". That seems about right to me, but the supreme court has granted a review of the case.

It makes me nervous when we begin to question or even fear those who are supposedly trusted guardians of society. I would be furious if they treated my daughter this way and would be pressing for sexual assault.

Students don't have full constitutional rights in school (or in their own homes), due to parental rights and en loco parentis.

That said, the stripsearching for the pill was over the top. However, she broke federal law by dispensing the prescription strength ibuprofen. If you have a daughter who needs ibuprofen for menstrual cramps, make arrangements with school nurse to have a bottle of ibuprofen (with necessary permissions) to be kept at the nurse's office.

Originally Posted by perdidochas

Students don't have full constitutional rights in school (or in their own homes), due to parental rights and en loco parentis.

That said, the stripsearching for the pill was over the top. However, she broke federal law by dispensing the prescription strength ibuprofen. If you have a daughter who needs ibuprofen for menstrual cramps, make arrangements with school nurse to have a bottle of ibuprofen (with necessary permissions) to be kept at the nurse's office.

Students specifically or Minors in general?
She was suspected of breaking the law by dispensing prescription strength ibuprofin, which has never been proven.
(And I believe minors are protected by the 14th Amendment).

As an accused she would be protected by due process and the 5th amendment.
Did school officials have the authority to perform a strip search based upon an accusation?

I'm not familiar with en loco parentis - will look it up.

Originally Posted by kshRox01

Students specifically or Minors in general?
She was suspected of breaking the law by dispensing prescription strength ibuprofin, which has never been proven.
(And I believe minors are protected by the 14th Amendment).

As an accused she would be protected by due process and the 5th amendment.
Did school officials have the authority to perform a strip search based upon an accusation?

I'm not familiar with en loco parentis - will look it up.

Case law has affirmed that students can be searched under reasonable suspicion rather than probable cause. Due process in the case of schools is that if there is reasonable suspicion, a student can be searched. I don't believe it's all minors, but minors in a school situation.

En loco parentis means in place of the parent. Basically it's a legal principle that the school (and it's officials) are acting in the place of the parent in the parents' absence.

Of course, there is searched and then there is searched. I do not believe a search that involves stripping a student to her underwear, no matter how much fun it is, will withstand judicial scrutiny.

Originally Posted by PatrickT

Of course, there is searched and then there is searched. I do not believe a search that involves stripping a student to her underwear, no matter how much fun it is, will withstand judicial scrutiny.

I agree totally with that.

Originally Posted by PatrickT

Of course, there is searched and then there is searched. I do not believe a search that involves stripping a student to her underwear, no matter how much fun it is, will withstand judicial scrutiny.

The Federal Court of Appeals ruled in the students favor but the case is under review by the Supreme Court.

Our Constitutional rights protect us from an overbearing government. For example, the free speech guarantee does not mean you can say what you want and be free from repercusions. It simply says that no law can be passed making what you say a criminal offense.

I have a real problem with saying that schools are a subdivision of the government and therefore are bound by the Constitutional protections. I think it is quite permissible to search lockers and seize firearms and illicit drugs.

Originally Posted by PatrickT

Our Constitutional rights protect us from an overbearing government. For example, the free speech guarantee does not mean you can say what you want and be free from repercusions. It simply says that no law can be passed making what you say a criminal offense.

I have a real problem with saying that schools are a subdivision of the government and therefore are bound by the Constitutional protections. I think it is quite permissible to search lockers and seize firearms and illicit drugs.

It is, with reasonable suspicion as the criteria. The school are a subdivision of the government, but they are also en loco parentis, since most students are minors. The school can do many things parents can do.

Originally Posted by perdidochas

It is, with reasonable suspicion as the criteria. The school are a subdivision of the government, but they are also en loco parentis, since most students are minors. The school can do many things parents can do.

And obviously some things parents can't do.

I would not advise any parent to strip search their tween or teen daughter down to her underwear, then search her underwear while she is still wearing them.

They would very likely wind up getting a visit from the Sherriffs department with a warrant to investigate their home for child abuse.

It is also likely someone at the school their daughter attends would have been the one to report them as teachers are mandatory reporters.

Schools are absolutely under the Department of Education as a Government Institution and act as a reporting agency.

I just went to my daughter's parent teacher conference where I spoke to her IEP/ILP coordinator. This lady complemented me as a good father and commended me for some things which left me wondering how she would know - so I asked her.

She told me she had my daughter write a report about her mother and my divorce and how she felt coming to live with me as the custodial parent.

Okay, nice, all well and good and I do like this lady, my daughters teachers and the school she attends, however this was a direct solicitation for personal information concerning our family and household. Also - should this ladies counterpart at the previous school she attended done the same thing it may not have gone as well as they had reason for bias due to some conflicts with the school and myself regarding how her IEP/ILP was being handled - hence the change of venues.

Just interesting stuff . . .