new jersey v. t.l.o.
Case name: New Jersey v. T.L.O.
Year decided: 1985
Result: 6-3, in favor of New Jersey
Related constitutional issue/amendment: Fourth Amendment (search and seizure)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil liberties
Significance/precedent: The Court ruled that searches conducted on school grounds do not have to require a "probable cause" that an individual has broken a law. While schools are prohibited from conducting unreasonable search and seizures of students' possessions, he Court found that the search of T.L.O.'s purse was indeed reasonable under the Fourth Amendment because school administrators has "reasonable suspicion" that T.L.O. violated a school rule. Schools must prove that they have reasonable suspicion rather than probable cause to search students. Also, the individual's expectation of privacy is outweighed by the school's goal of providing a safe school environment maintaining order and discipline and.
Quote from majority opinion: "By focusing attention on the question of reasonableness, the standard will spare teachers and school administrators the necessity of schooling themselves in the niceties of probable cause and permit them to regulate their conduct according to the dictates of reason and common sense. At the same time, the reasonableness standard should ensure that the interests of students will be invaded no more than is necessary to achieve the legitimate end of preserving order in the schools."
Summary of the dissent: The Court allows for a broad exception of the Fourth Amendment by requiring that schools merely provide "reasonable suspicion" rather than the "probable cause" standard stated expressly in the Fourth Amendment. The Court is permitting schools to circumvent the standards that the Court has developed through years of judging Fourth Amendment cases.
Six-word summary: Schools can conduct reasonable warrantless searches.
Year decided: 1985
Result: 6-3, in favor of New Jersey
Related constitutional issue/amendment: Fourth Amendment (search and seizure)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil liberties
Significance/precedent: The Court ruled that searches conducted on school grounds do not have to require a "probable cause" that an individual has broken a law. While schools are prohibited from conducting unreasonable search and seizures of students' possessions, he Court found that the search of T.L.O.'s purse was indeed reasonable under the Fourth Amendment because school administrators has "reasonable suspicion" that T.L.O. violated a school rule. Schools must prove that they have reasonable suspicion rather than probable cause to search students. Also, the individual's expectation of privacy is outweighed by the school's goal of providing a safe school environment maintaining order and discipline and.
Quote from majority opinion: "By focusing attention on the question of reasonableness, the standard will spare teachers and school administrators the necessity of schooling themselves in the niceties of probable cause and permit them to regulate their conduct according to the dictates of reason and common sense. At the same time, the reasonableness standard should ensure that the interests of students will be invaded no more than is necessary to achieve the legitimate end of preserving order in the schools."
Summary of the dissent: The Court allows for a broad exception of the Fourth Amendment by requiring that schools merely provide "reasonable suspicion" rather than the "probable cause" standard stated expressly in the Fourth Amendment. The Court is permitting schools to circumvent the standards that the Court has developed through years of judging Fourth Amendment cases.
Six-word summary: Schools can conduct reasonable warrantless searches.