Supreme Court Case protecting Students Rights
I want you to go over to one of the following websites and read about one students fight to protect her individual rights at school...(Copy and Paste)
http://kdka.com/national/teen.strip.search.2.1058825.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/25/savana-redding-strip-sear_n_220717.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/04/22/2009-04-22_teen_to_supreme_court_i_was_stripped_of_dignity.html
So after reading the articles please answer the following questions...
1) What is the background of the case? Who is involved and what is the main problem surrounding the case?
2) What verdict did the Supreme Court come to and why did they come to that verdict?
3) What is your opinion on the whole situation and what is Clark County School Districts policy on this situation today? (This answer needs to be to 3 paragraphs)
This is a fascinating case and does affect every single student in America. Good Luck and remember to always be school appropriate in your responses. And have a Happy FOURTH OF JULY!!!!!
1)The people involved in this case are Savana Redding and Stafford Middle School officials, Kerry Wilson and the school nurse. The main problem surrounding this case was the violation of the fourth amendment. Savana Redding was strip searched in an investigation of prescription drugs, ibuprofen.
ReplyDelete2)The Supreme Court verdict was that school officials violated Savana Redding rights by strip searching her for prescription drugs. In an 8 to 1 ruling justices concluded that school officials violated the fourth amendment. School educators cannot force students to remove their clothing unless student safety is at risk. The court also ruled that the school officials could not be financialy liable but left it to lower courts to decide if school district should. The diffrences in opinions from the supreme court was substantial enough to require immunity of the school officials.
3)I believe the Supreme Courts ruling was fair. The school official at Stafford Middle School did not have substantial reason to strip search Savana. School officials should have substantial evidence before strip searching and only be used to protect students. I am sure that the whole situation was traumatic for her at such a young age. The school officials should have considered this before they strip searched her.
I do not agree with the immunity of the school officals. They should be held financialy liable. Why potentialy punish the whole school district when the ones at fault are left with no punishment. I believe the school officials simply got a slap on the hand and nothing more. I think the Supreme Court should have made an example that this would not be tolarated.
The Clark County School Districts policy on this sitution today is that searches of a student or possesions must be reasonable. This requires that the search be justified prior to the beggining of the search and be related to the circumstances giving rise to the search.In the absence of extrodinary circumstance the student/possesion my be surched only if the student voluntarily consents to the search or prior to the search there is resonable suspicion that the student is hiding evidence of wrong doing and appropriate law enforcement conduct the search. A school administrator or designee shall conduct the search with a school employee as a witness with information on the student and the accused wrongdoing.
1. In this case The Supreme Court took up a case in regards to an illegal search and seizure which violates the 4th amendment of the Constitution. Savana Redding a student at an Arizona middle school was strip searched when a tip came in from a fellow peer. The report claimed that Savana Redding had possessed pills and certain types of medication. The school district restricted by policy to allow prescription drugs. The student had accused her of obtaining two pills which was equivalent to about two Advil’s.
ReplyDelete2. When the court took up the case they decided in favor of Savana Redding and against the state of Arizona. They had concluded that certain rights were definitely violated in this case. The educators of the school had certainly crossed all lines and limitations.
3. My opinion in regards to this particular case was in total favor of the courts decision. Once too much power is given to the school or government in terms of illegal searches, than others will be bound to take advantage of their “police powers.” This decision definitely sent a message to all schools and education establishments. This was not just for Savana Redding, but a statement and a message that all students can agree on around the country. This shows that even as students we do have those unalienable rights which have been endowed by our founding fathers.
As for the policies of the Clark County School District I believe it is the same here as in the rest of the country. Searches would only be conducted if and only if there is reasonable evidence showing a potential threat against other students and staff. Since this decision was reached at the high courts hopefully others will see and think twice before making such a haste full choice to strip search anyone. Once these rights have been violated than who knows what’s next. My opinion has always been the same in regards to too much power granted to the government.
Certain search and seizures can be justified but only through very specific situations. If they are believed to have weapons or something of that nature than yes. However, if the only suspicion is two pills, than that’s not serious enough to do what they did. What the school did was unquestionably one of the worst inexcusable things I’ve ever heard of. Not only it’s incorrect but it’s also immoral and extremely disrespectful. I was very sickened that this occurred to an innocent student guilty of nothing major.
1) In 2003, thirteen year old Savanna Redding was removed from class and strip-searched by officials who suspected Redding of possessing prescription-strength ibuprofen. Redding, her family and her lawyer argued that the school officials had violated the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.
ReplyDelete2) The Supreme Court ruled in Savanna's favor, stating that it was unlawful for school officials to strip-search a student unless student safety was at risk.
3.) In my opinion, the Supreme Court was correct in standing by Savanna Redding. As she pointed out, most kids are already very awkward at that age, and school officials have no business committing such a demeaning act without probable cause. I agree with the fact that students should be searched if there is any suspicion that they are in possession of a weapon or drugs, but strip-searching an individual based on suspicion alone is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Perhaps, had the situation been more dire than mere suspicion of student possession of ibuprofen, the search might have been justifiable. However, the fact is, even if she had been in possession of the pills, they posed no threat to any other student.
Clark County School District's policy on the search of students states that school personnel may not require students to expose either intimate undergarments or any part of the body covered by intimate undergarments. The policy also declares that any search of a student's body must be performed by an official of the student's same sex and that they should not unnecessarily touched. CCSD's policy also specifies that strip-searching is only necessary to avoid an immediate threat to safety, welfare, and/or health. In my opinion, Clark County School District's search policy is an effective one. It maintains student safety while at the same time acknowledging student's rights.
It is my belief that students should think of their school as a safe place. When school officials take action against any one of their students as they did in the case of Savanna Redding, school no longer feels like a safe institution. I am pleased with the outcome of this case and I hope that no student will ever again be forced to endure such a humiliating and unnecessary search. Without probable cause, any form of a strip-search should be considered, as Redding's lawyer stated, a form of sexual harassment. Only in dire situations should any form of strip-search be employed, and only under strict guidelines such as the ones specified in the Clark Count School District's policy.
1) At the tip of another student, Savana Redding had her back pack search for supposed prescription ibuprofen. The search of the girl’s backpack yielded none of the afore mentioned drug and I use the term ‘drug’ lightly. It’s Tylenol not crack. But I digress. Anyway when the search came up empty she was sent to the nurse’s office and told to strip to show it was not hiding on her person. Still the search yielded not a single pill.
ReplyDelete2) The supreme court ruled that it was an unreasonable search that violated her 4th amendment right to reasonable searches. The vote was 9:1 They came to this decision because all grandstanding aside, there clearly wasn’t enough proof to conduct a strip search, much less one on a child with no parent or guardian present.
3) My opinion is that this was a matter that could have been totally avoided if everyone sat down and thought about the repercussions of their actions a moment. How can anyone in their right mind, especially an adult who is in charge of a child’s well being think that a partial strip search is the way to go? For some aspirin at that. A parent should have been called, the child pulled out of class and a conference of some sort held to talk about this reasonably. Then if necessary a search could have been preformed, by the police. It is in no way a teacher’s job to conduct a search on a student under any circumstances. That’s just begging for a lawsuit.
What irks me quite a bit about this case was the sheer unfoundedness of the search and the presumptuousness of the administer that conducted it. Now I’m not expert at law by any means, all my information about said subject come from Law and Order re-runs, but isn’t it very illegal to conduct a search without probable cause or a warrant for that matter? It mentioned a 1985 case that said that search didn’t need to have probable cause but, ‘reasonable suspicions’. The word of another student is not what I consider probable cause or a reasonable suspicion, it’s rumors and gossip, normal school stuff. Not to say that allegations of drug pushing should be taken lightly, but it should be handled better then haphazardly have a child strip and shake out her bra.
As far as I know Clark counties drug policy is pretty much cut and dry. If your suspected you’re called in, questioned, and if there is still suspicions bags are checked parents are called, and the police are informed. Pretty simple. But I also know for a fact that administration is not going to waste their time on kids handing out tablets of Tylenol. It’s a matter of judgment and discretion. There are more important things to worry about then aspirin, especially in the area of town that Valley is in. I guess that one must take into consideration the rural area that this fiasco happened in. It’s the only way I can think to justify it. I guess to them pushing aspirin is a big deal. But in the Vegas and most of the urban world, eh, not so much.
1. Savana Redding was strip-searched when she was just 13 years old in Safford, Arizona in 2003. Officials pulled Redding out of class to perform the search which began with a simple backpack search and evolved into an “almost” naked search. Official strip-searched Redding because another student accused for offering the prescription-strength Ibuprofen. In the end, no drugs were found.
ReplyDelete2. The Supreme Court ruled that school officials violated Redding’s rights by declaring that educators are not allowed to force children to remove their clothing unless they are at risk. Moreover, with the 8-1 ruling the Supreme Court clearly stated that Safford Middle School officials violated the Fourth Amendment which bans unreasonable searches. The justices decided that the officials could not be held financially liable so they left it up to the lower courts for this decision.
3. In my opinion, the Supreme Court did the right thing to protect Redding’s rights. There’s no reason that justifies the officials’ wrongdoing even if they were looking for drugs, which were not found in the end. On the second part of the verdict, I think the Supreme Court was very lenient because those officials should have been jailed for what they did. Overall, I am very content with the ruling because it makes me feel more secure at school and I know that there are people out there that care for our rights as students.
In addition, I agree that the school officials violated the Fourth Amendment as it 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 not Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” I think this case does not fit the statement above meaning that the searched was illegal and the criminals should be punished.
The Clark County School District (CCSD) policy on this situation relates very much to the statement provided along with the Fourth Amendment. The CCSD declares the searches must be reasonable and it requires justification before the commencement of it. Exceptions include: Student voluntarily consents search; search is necessary to maintain discipline, order and safety on campus and/or it is part of law enforcement. Also, it is mandated that the needs to be another school employee as witness and the student needs to be told why he/she is being search for. There’s some more to this regulation, but I think this is the punch line. Finally, I totally agree with the policy held by CCSD on this situation and I feel like, as of today, we will not face the same problem here in Clark County.
1. Savana Redding was strip searched at the age of 13 in Safford Middle School in Arizona in search of ibuprofen. Nothing was found, but she was humiliated. This was acted upon because of a tip school officials received from another student claiming Redding had given it to him/her.
ReplyDelete2. The Supreme Court ruled that the strip search was unreasonable because educators should resort to a strip search only when the student's safety is at risk. They came to this decision because they realized that Redding's fourth amendment right was violated by the school officials.
3. This case is pretty difficult because I believe the students' rights should be protected, but i also think that school officials should do their best to make sure every student's safety is ensured. In this case, the medicine they were looking for is not risky. They shouldn't have had to strip search her & make the whole situation awkward & embarassing. What makes it even worse is that they didn't find anything on her. She went through this whole thing, even though she was innocent.
The school officials had no other evidence other than the tip from the one student. That's not enough grounds to make a student go through this horrifying experience. Although i don't agree with the strip search, if they had to do it, they should have done it under supervision. They should have called her parents and made them aware of the situation. I am ecstatic about the Supreme Court's decision on this. They made the correct choice.
Clark County School Districts policy on strip searches is the same as any in the U.S. The search has to be reasonable & there has to be a probable cause. It states that the student's "intimate undergarments" or "skin normally covered" may not be shown. The only exception is when the student's safety is at risk. There also needs to be another school official as a witness and the student needs to know why they are being searched. Overall, I think this case was essential because it set the limits to what schools can and can't do.
Background/involved/problem: A teenage girl in Arizona right's were violated by being strip-searched for ibeprofen. School officials violated the 4th Amendment which is ban of unreasonable search.
ReplyDeleteVerdict:The supreme court ruled that educators should not force children to remove their clothing unless student safety is at risk.
1)The background of the case consists of a schoolmate accusing Savanaof giving her pills and officials believing that Savana was concealing pills in her undergarments . Savana Redding and the school officials are the ones involved in the main problem. The problem surrounding the case is the controversy debating if a strip search was appropriate in a public school and if the officials could be held responsible.
ReplyDelete2)The Final verdict was an 8-1 ruling, the justices said that Safford Middle School officials violated the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches with their treatment of Savana Redding. The court also ruled the middle school officials could not be held liable in a lawsuit for the search.
3)After reading Safford Unified School District vs. April Redding, I believe that the court should have held the officials responsible. The officials from the school were out of line in strip searching Savana. I agree with Ginsburg when he states: “Wilson's treatment of Redding was abusive and it was not reasonable for him to believe that the law permitted it. Also searching her for Ibuprofen, which is a drug that you cannot get high on, was ridiculous. I’m glad that Savana isn’t traumatized by this experience and I’m glad that her mother fought in the case so that it wouldn’t happen to other children.
If I was in this situation, I would not have let them strip search me. I would have called my parents and told them what the school was trying to do to me. As most parents would, my parents would definitely come down to the school and talk to the principal about this behavior. Say if this strip search did occur, than I would fight the officials. The court decided that the individuals were not to be held responsible. The school could in fact be held responsible though. My family would sue the school for violating me.
Clark County School District policies are as follows: Searches of a student’s person or possessions while at school must be reasonable. Reasonableness requires that the search be justified prior to its commencement and be related to the circumstance giving rise to the search. Absent extraordinary circumstances, a student’s person and possessions may be subject to search on school property only if:
A. The student voluntarily consents to the search; or
B. Prior to a search there is an individualized, reasonable suspicion that the student is hiding evidence of a wrongdoing; and
1. A search is necessary to maintain school discipline, order or safety, and to prevent the removal or destruction of evidence, and
2. The search is reasonable in scope and methods as related to the alleged wrongdoing and the age and sex of the student, and
3. The search is conducted in accordance with this regulation; or
C. Appropriate law enforcement authorities conduct the search.
1.)
ReplyDeleteThe case is regarding to a violation done by school officials to a 13 year old female student. The violated female student, Savana Redding, underwent an invasive search for ibuprofen pills. What was wrong about their actions was concerning to the violation of the 4th Amendment when they asked to search her underwear. The school officials were told by one of the students that Redding was carrying a drug with her; therefore they summoned Redding and searched her backpack and clothes. Moreover, they told her to remove her bra and underwear. It was truly a disturbing incident to a girl who was in puberty.
2.)
The Supreme Court ruled unfavorably with the accused. It was considered unconstitutional becausethey found their search unreasonable.
3.)
This case truly shocked me. After reading the articles about this case, I felt so sad for the girl, and angry at the same time. I imagined how embarrassing her experience was. Even though it was a female nurse who asked her to remove her clothes, it’s still uncomfortable to do that especially to a teenager like Redding. I am so intrigued by this case that it makes me want to ask her how she was able to overcome this situation.
I am thankful that Redding was able to share this disturbing incident in her life. What the officials did was definitely discouraging. It was least anticipated to happen in a school and be done by school officials. They were expected to be aware of privacy policies since they administer the school. Unfortunately, they weren’t that knowledgeable to know about 4th amendment.
Clark County School District’s policy on search and seizures says that school officials can only strip search a student only if it’s necessary to prevent a threat to safety, health or welfare. Moreover, it also states that search of a student’s body can only be done by the same sex as the student. Last but not the least, the search has to be consented by the parents or guardians of the student. It can also be consented if the student voluntarily consent it. Each search also needs to be justified prior to its date of search.
1.In Safford, Arizona in 2003, Savana Redding was strip-searched when she was 13 years old.
ReplyDeleteThe caused of the strip was because a student accused her of offerind prescription-strength Ibuprofen. As simple as it was, to begin with her backpack was the first place, but it ended in an close to naked search. At the end no drug was found, but on the contrary she was humiliated.
2.The supreme court decision expressed that the officials did not act in the correct manner. The search was unreasonable because a strip cannot be conduct unless a student's safety is at risk and therefore educators should not strip a student. Also to the supreme court they knew that the educator had violated the right Redding has given by the fourth amendment.
3.In my opinion, The Supreme Court did the right chose by protecting Redding's right. The authority that an educator has should not be taken advantaged of. The solution is not to strip down a student to prove she carries drugs. At the end of the serach nothing was found as that's because they used a student's word as evidence that led to wrong doing.
Redding's integrity was hurt as well as her being place under the loop for drug using. The drug that was being searched for was not a deadly drug. The consequences of the officials and the way they acted ended up in embarassing a student who was innocent in this intriging situation. I believe the Supreme Court made the right decision on taking Redding's side. The fourth amendment clearly states it and the educator should be removed from the position that they are placed on. They should also face the Supreme Court because justice needs to be made so that it doesn't occur once again.
Clack County School District's policy on strip searches is the same as any in the U.S. If there are not arguements then a strip search should not be conducted. In order to be cause there must be a reason and for a case to be probable. A student's intimate undergarments should not be showned with only the exception of the student's safety as at risk. Also when it occurs a witness should be present and the student should have knowledge of why she is being stripped. Overall, I think because the case of Redding, schools can be more aware of a similar incident to occur.
1. The background of the case is that this middle schooler (Savana Redding) had brought IB profen to school, and was accused of bringing which lead to being strip searched. The people involved were of course her, her county of Safford, Arizona, her school and the supreme court. The pain problem surrounding the case is the fact that her school district violated the Fourth Amendment which was a ban on unreasonable searches.
ReplyDelete2. The supreme court came to the conclusion that her middle school officials had violated her rights by being strip-searched. They came to that decision because it did violate the fourth amendment, which was the amendment ban on unreasonable searches.
3. My opinion about this whole situation is the fact that it was unreasonable, they shouldn't of striped searched her for just pills that were equivilant to advil. It was unethical and unamerican and i am glad that the supreme court ruled what they did. The sad part is that they can't even strip-search prisoners, and they strip search a 13 year old? It is a violation of her priviacy and terrible thing to do.
1) This case involves young teen Savana Redding and her problem consists of school officals strip searching her in search for some ibuprofen, she finds this to be extreme.
ReplyDelete2) The supreme court ruled against the school officals for they violated 13 yr old Savanas right to the fourth ammendment. They also found the plaintill not liable finaciaclly for their actions.
3) In my opinion, strip searching a girl at that age, in such a venue as school, is disturbing. It is completely unheard of, especailly since the search was for some harmless Advils. It is embarrassing and quite sad, if i put myself in her shoes, I would never feel comfortable in school and with any officals ever again.
I am extremely happy with the justices decision, although it seems to be a case of common sense. No one in the right mind could find it necessary to strip search a girl in middle school for such a small offense. I trully hope this draws a line for all men and woman who are held in power in such a place as school. At every school there seems to be that mean offical who takes matters to extremes, this just goes to show that sometimes it is a little to extreme.
Clark County now allows there to be a strip search in school ONLY if the terms are necessary enough and the offense comes to piont of violation to safety, health or welfare. The searcher needs to be of same sex, and parents need to be consulted and agree to the search. Remember, these are just the rules for a strip search taken place in a clark county school, they do not carry over to other venues.
This is a comment to Lee's response:
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lee's response. I also felt shocked when I read this. Violating Redding was wrong and I'm also glad that she stood up for herself against the school. The school should have invited the parents to attend this search before invading her. This situation was embarrassing and also unfortunate.
The Clark County policy follows the 4th amendment and also cares about the children. The policy states you are only allowed to do a strip search if necessary to prevent the threat of a student. The child's parent MUST consent to the search. This ensures that the parents are aware of the situation, unlike what happened to Redding. Some schools have thrown out strip searching because of this situation, and for that a thank you to Redding is necessary.
-After Savana Redding was searched for ibuprofin at the tip of another student, nothing showed up in her backpack. So, officials at Stafford Middle School decided that a strip search would be necessary to find the said drugs to see if she was hiding them in her body. They sent her off to the nurse and embarrassed the poor girl whose 4th amendment had just been violated.
ReplyDelete-With an 8 to 1 ruling by the Supreme Court, it was said that the school officials had no solid evidence that could possibly lead to this illegal, unreasonable search. After they ruled the middle school's actions unconstitutional, they did say that the middle school officials could not be held liable.
_____I was truly shocked and sympathized with Savanna. You would think that the law of the land would still apply to a school. I understand that the school also has rules, but they should not have applied their silly rules against actual, written law.
_____Clark County policies dictate that lockers and other belongings assigned by the district are subject to search at any time and the student should not expect privacy. Also, "Searches of a student’s person or possessions while at school must be reasonable. Reasonableness requires that the search be justified prior to its commencement and be related to the circumstance giving rise to the search." It then goes to say that a search could only be conducted of a student's belongings and body if the student consents, there is a reasonable suspicion, or proper law enforcement conducts the search.
_____The Clark County policies did throw me off. They say in their policy that a search will be conducted is there is a reasonable suspicion, but to them, anything could be reasonable and suspicious. Their definition of 'reasonableness' kind of goes in a circle which means they can conduct a search on any terms.
I would like to comment on Erica’s blog in regards to the Supreme Court’s decision which involved an illegal search on a middle school student. I completely support Erica’s opinion with the court’s decision. It is very important that judges and high courts stand by these young American citizens because they are seen as the most vulnerable of all. It is important to point out searches would make more sense if there is an actual safety concern to students or staff. In cases like these is no justification for a complete strip-search when there is no probable cause for this type of reaction.
ReplyDeleteI stand firmly with what Erica has said and along with the court’s choice on behalf of this case. I feel that the decision made here will intern support those in other schools who fear an unreasonable search on their person. Like Erica said “It is my belief that students should think of their school as a safe place.” Once this thought has been eliminated for the sake of security we will ultimately pay for this in a way we will all regret. The future of this great nation relies on the youth and growing. We need to insure that every student feels safe and at the same time feel they are entitled rights as well. Ensuring safety and responsibility without infringing upon the rights of every student, is the ultimate goal of the education system here in America.
1) What is the background of the case? Who is involved and what is the main problem surrounding the case?
ReplyDeleteA young woman from eastern Arizona is fighting against Safford Middle School officials who strip- searched her at the age of 13. According to Kdka.com the officials from Savanna’s (victim) middle school were (at that time) searching for drugs (OTC). This woman, (according to the same website) stated that she wanted to go to court because her 4th amendment was violated (which guards against unreasonable searches or seizures), and she did not want any other student to go through that.
2) What verdict did the Supreme Court come to and why did they come to that verdict?
It was eminent; a result of 8-1 in favor of Savanna was concluded, one of the two judges said that there was not enough probable cause for the school officials to strip- search Savanna.
3) What is your opinion on the whole situation and what is Clark County School Districts policy on this situation today? (This answer needs to be to 3
Paragraphs)
Personally feel very sorry for this student who went through this embarrassing moment at a very young age, especially because some of us might say… “Well she should have done something about it.” The true is the many of us students are not aware of our rights. As well the age has a lot to do with this case. Savanna was 13 and like judge David Souter ruled “there were not enough reasonable causes for the search.”
I was not very well informed about student’s rights until I started searching for this assignment. Also I did not know that the 4th amendment guards anyone in the United States against unreasonable searches and seizures. I have seen many people drop out of school for very insignificant reasons and I hope that strip-search will not become legal so more students will not feel safe in their schools and drop out. In the news I have hear many times that schools are one of the safest places for people to be in. Especially because there are teachers and tutors who can take care of us, and because the rooms can locked down.
School like news state “There is only less than 1% chance of being shot,” and what about abused physically? Savanna should not have went through that situation were she was strip- search at a very young age and were she could not do much to protect or defend herself. If a student could be carrying anything that will endanger the school that student should be search, and still strip- searching is unnecessary. A student should always be protected and guarded by its rights.
1)The background of the case involves Savanna Redding, a 13 year old girl whom was removed from class and strip-searched by school officials because they suspected that Savanna was in possession of ibuprofen. The main problem with this case is the simple violation of the 4th amemdment. At the end no drugs were found.
ReplyDelete2) The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in Savanna's favor, because it is unlawful to strip search somebody when no students safety is at risk.
3) Safford Unified School District vs April Redding was a case that really surprised me. The school officials had no right to strip search a student for a simple drug such as ibuprofen, its not like she is smuggling weed or crack at school. Its just a painkiller not a hallucinogen, the school officials were way out of line and they were abusive towards Savanna. The strip search made the student feel awkward and embarrassed and the worst part is that she was innocent. She had no pills and went through the whole ordeal for no reason.
The School also had no proof against Savanna, so the school had no right to take matters upon themselves and conduct a strip search with no evidence. They should of just asked the student to see if she was in possession of the drugs and if not they should of called the parents in and dealed with it then. They should not of just went straight through a strip search as thought she was smuggling weapons or something. It was just wrong, I agree with the supreme courts decision.
In order to conduct a strip search in clark county is like conducting one anywhere in the United States, it most reasonable and should have probable causes. The only time a students skin should be shown is if the students well being is at risk. The students must know why they are being searched and have to give consent of it. There also must be a school official present as a witness.
1. The Supreme Court case was about Savana Redding, a 13 year at the time, who was pulled out of class and taken to the school nurse. Then she was told to strip down to her undergarments, and the search continued to the point where she had to expose her breasts and pelvic area. All because the staff thought she was carrying ibuprofen, which was never found. The mother of the eight-grade student sued the School District stating that her daughter's 4th amendment right was violated.
ReplyDelete2. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Redding 8 to 1 and deemed the strip search unconstitutional. The Justices believed that the strength or quantity of the drugs the school was any danger to other students. Also that the school had no valid reason to suspect Savana Redding of having those drugs.
3. I agree with the Supreme Court's decision that the school did violate Savana Redding's 4th amendment right. The circumstances in which the search held were unacceptable and it should not have taken so long for this case to reach a final verdict. School should have taken some different actions, considering Redding was only 13 at the time, and should have taken the consequences of their actions into account.
However, I did hope that the Supreme Court would clarify some points on their verdict. Such as, at what point is it lawful to search a student and how far is search allowed? These points are of concern because there are those who could take advantage of the court's ruling if some parts aren't made clearly.
CCSD's policy on searches states that when searching a student's person or belongings must be reasonable. Without extreme circumstances a student can only be searched given the student or guardian's consent. Also if there is reasonable suspicion of the student or the proper authorities are to conduct the search that a search is allowed.
The case was in 2003 a 13 year old Savanna Redding was taken out of her class and forced to strip, exposing her whole body. The problem with this is that it violates the 4th amendment.
ReplyDeleteThe Supreme Court ruled in the favor of Savanna Redding, because in fact it was unlawful unless it was going to harm her or others.
I do agree with the Supreme Courts decision to rule in Savanna's favor. The whole search was over a pill. I’m sorry, if I was a middle school administrator and found out my student had "a pill" if anything I would talk to the parent not do a full on strip search. Especially to a girl at that age, most girls at that age are nervous about their own bodies. This might have caused some serious emotional damage since Savanna was left naked at the end of the search.
Clark County School Districts policy on searching a student is that a student can only be search when there is sufficient evidence that the student posses an item that will harm others or him/herself. The person conducting the search must be the same sex as the student; there also need to be a witness in the room.
I do agree with Clark County’s Policy it is smart and well though out. It gives the school administrator enough ground to ensure safety for the students of their school. And the policy doesn’t give the school too much “lee way”. This protects the county from any lawsuits and any cases like this one it was unfortunate that this had to happen to anyone but I believe everyone is going to think twice about unlawfully searching students in the future.
This is a comment to Jasmyn Franklin. I agree with what she said to have refused against being searched. But, when you are placed in the situation it will be shocking. To think of ideas would have taken time because an accusation was placed. The officials indeed acted wrong because there wasn't any actual evidence against her, it was just anothe student's word.
ReplyDeleteCalling our parents would have been the best choice to do. They are legal guardians and probably could have saved her. The embarrasement she went through cannot be changed. The humiliation she took in was big. Jasmyn, parents are helpful, but when someone is at shock it is hard to act fast.
This is in response to Saul. He is right, a student cannot get search without prove. He said,"The school officials had no right to strip search a student for a simple drug such as ibuprofen, its not like she is smuggling weed or crack at school." He is right. If it would have been weed or crack then there could have been some justification. But no justification can be worth the humialiton she was face with.
ReplyDeleteHer rights got violated and whoever are the responsables they need to pay. A case like such needs to have consequences. If it stays without a solution, the same mistake can be made again. One last thing, officials should know what they are allowed to do. They also need to get more training in order to be ready when such situation is brought forth. A plan should be enacted and be followed.
This comment is to Elayne’s response:
ReplyDeleteYou said: “But, when you are placed in the situation it will be shocking…. Jasmyn, parents are helpful, but when someone is at shock it is hard to act fast.” I agree that it would be shocking. I think as you get older, you develop a sense of what is right and what is wrong. An adult who is older knows that this is wrong, and would be willing to fight. I’m glad she fought and I’m sure her parents had to help her. I guess being the person I am, I know that I can depend on my parents, and I know someone can’t stop me from calling them.
I also agree with EVERYONE’S response in saying that the court made the right ruling. Nobody would want this to happen to them. Everyone can show sympathy for this girl and her situation. All know that this is wrong and that this should never have happened. This is probably the only blog where everyone is on the same side of the discussion.
1)The people that were involved in this case are Stafford Middle School officials, the schools nurse who strip searched another person involved in the case named Savana Redding, and Kerry Wilson. The main problem surrounding this case was the violation of the fourth amendment. This was all thought because two students accused Savana of having ibuprofen.
ReplyDelete2) The case of Safford Unified School District v. Savana Redding they voted in favor of Savana Redding. Savana’s rights were definetly violated because she was strip searched because it should only happen in case a students safety was at risk. This is what they called the most extreme conditions to strip search a student.
3)My opinion on this case is that this is totally wrong to do to a student for having a ibuprofen. I understand that if a student came up and was like oh, Savana Redding has a gun in her underwear then a strip search would be reasonable. But why would they do this to this girl. Not only does it cause embarassment but it also causes fear for her to even feel comfortable at school.
If this happened to me I dont think I could even look at the same teachers again. Honestly I believe the supreme court made the right decision in how they handled this. The only reason that a student should have to be strip searched is if a students safety is at risk or any other person is at risk. Not from having a pill and also the funny thing was she didn’t even have pills on her.
Clark counties policy is that your checked like your bag, locker etc. They don’t force to strip search you unless a students safety or health are at risk. Also, clark county requires that a person of the same sex do the strip search and no unnecessary touching to the student.
1. The people involved in this case are Savana Redding and Stafford Middle School officials, Kerry Wilson and the school nurse. The main problem of this case the violation of the fourth amendment when she got strip searched in an investigation of prescription drugs.
ReplyDelete2. The Supreme Court ruled in in her favor because they said that it was unlawful for school the officials to strip-search anybody unless the students safety is at risk.
3. I think that it was a violation of her privacy and that they did not need to do that to her. The ruling of the supreme court was just because they did not have the right to strip search her. I am glad that
I don’t think that they should have searched her, and they did not have the right to search her, because she was not doing any harm to herself or others. All the school officials had as so called evidence was just their suspicion. With suspicion is not really considered evidence. In fact, they violated the fourth amendment which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures.
I think that from this incident people are going to be more aware and more cautious about their actions. In my opinion I don’t think that the school nurse should have agreed to search the teenager, knowing that their wasn’t enough evidence.
this comment is to eliana herrera...
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you say that the school district shouldn't be held financiably responsible when the one's who had the bad judgement calls just get a slap on the wrist as you put it. I beleive that they should be punished for that because that's horrible what they did. How does that girl go to school and feel safe and comfortable anymore? That would be just down right wrong.
I agree with you that the supreme court made the right decision in ruling in her favor. That was not right and no one was in any danger and why would a little girl hide pills in her undies. When you say it must have been traumatic for her that is true. She's young and she will never look at teachers the same. She's not gonna feel safe or comfortable anymore and that's what school is supposed to do for you.
This comment is to Jordan Moore.
ReplyDeleteWhen you say that I would talk to the parent about the pill I would to. That would be stupid to make a little girl stip to find a pill that might or might not be there. Which it wasn't but that's not the point. The point is she was violated and that's not right for such a young girl.
Also, when you say that girl's that age are worried about there bodies around that age is the truth. She could be traumatized by the whole experience. It might mess her up for her whole life. You don't even know the psychological things messed up with her now. I couldn't agree with you more Jordan.
This comment is to Lee.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lee because when I read this I was shocked and I actually wanted to give someone a piece of my mind. It's not right to emotionally hurt a girl that young. That's bad in my mind and hopefuly she goes through life ok. But that's beside the point I was emotional to Lee and it really made me wonder how could someone do this to such a young innocent girl.
Also, I agree that your glad she shared this with all of us and actually did something about it. I'm glad that she had the heart to tell people and make sure that this never happened to anyone else. Also before this I wasn't really sure of my rights in school and now I know just a little more. I'm glad that she had the guts to get out there and let the world know.
Jose,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you said that the supreme court made a good choice in favoring Redding. The school officials had no right to strip search her because of the fact that she had the substance, ibuprofen. I think that they violated her 4th amendment when they strip searched her. It was unacceptable because the reasons that they gave weren’t reasonable, or at least not reasonable enough to strip search the 13 year old.
I also agree you when you said that they should clarify at what point it is lawful to search a student and also how far the search can go. Honestly I think that the school officials took it too far when they had the strip search because she didn’t have any harmful substance on her, like a gun. They took it too far.
Elayne,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you said that they shouldn’t take a students word as
evidence because he could easily be lying. Even if they did take his word, they
should not have strip searched her. After searching her they found no evidence
of her obtaining any drugs. So they did the strip search, knowing they had little,
or no evidence to back up the search.
They violated her fourth amendment and that is not right, an amendment is there
for a reason and that reason is not to violate it. Like you said she was embarrassed
and her integrity was hurt. She had to have been in a very uncomfortable situation ,
even though the person that searched her was a lady nurse. And I am glad that the supreme court was in favor of Redding. I hope that after that incident, they are more careful.
1. This case involves Savana Redding being strip searched by Safford Middle School officials and having her Fourth Amendment rights violated.
ReplyDelete2. The Court came to an 8 to 1 verdict stating that Safford Middle School officials had violated Redding's Fourth Amendment rights because they had searched her unreasonably. They also stated that the Arizona school officials cannot be held finacially liable for the search.
3. My opinion on this whole situation is that the school officials shouldn't have had the right to strip search Redding because they had no reasonable cause for doing so. Suspecting a middle school student of carrying a few painpills isn't really a situation where officials would have to take such drastic measures. It just goes to show you what can happen when you give certain establishments too much power. It was couragious of Redding to come out to the authorities of what happened though.
I deeply agree with the court's decision in this case. The school officials went to far when they decided that they would just strip search a 13 year old for no good reason. It's sad that the officials weren't held lialbe because they knew that what they did was wrong. The next time something like this happens, the people who commited the crime should actually pay for it.
Here in Clark County,and most others, this type of activity would have to be reasonable. If a student or staff's health is in serious danger and there is evidence of it, then and only should it be allowed.