Does A School Have The Right To Confiscate...

[SCpoloRicker]

tsc is correct. (look back)

The armchair lawyers on this board make the armchair car enthusiasts look like Carrol Shelby.

/just sayin'

[Cow hunter]

i have just recently researched this, and in the constitution under the fourth ammendment the police have EVERY right to search anything that is yours that happens to be on school property, and its even worse because you were on the school computer, technically their property, so they can search your car, locker, person, anything without any real reasonable suspicion...... i belive it was an added rule in the 4th like the exclusionary, which may work in your defense, which staes that if nformation that is obtained illegally it cannot be used as evidence. but there's another rule that says that schools need no warrant or document stating reasons, and/or specified area/item to be searched or seized..........make what you will of this

[bleachit]

I just googled the 4th amendment, and unless the version I read was completely wrong no where did it mention school or a officer's right to search you based on nothing.

[Lohman446]

Apparently Supreme Court Justice Scalia found it written in there somewhere

The depreciation of Fourth Amendment protections in school have unfortunately continued further past the New Jersey v. T.L.O. decision. In the case of Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton the court approved of random drug testing of athletic students based on no suspicion or "reasonableness" at all. Writing for the opinion of the court Justice Scalia says that, "A search unsupported by probable cause can be constitutional, we have said, 'when special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement, make the warrant and probable-cause requirement impracticable.'" He then goes on to argue that "We have found such 'special needs' to exist in the public-school context. There the warrant requirement 'would unduly interfere with the maintenance of the swift and informal disciplinary procedures [that are] needed, 'and strict adherence to the requirement that searches be based upon probable cause' would undercut 'the substantial need of teachers and administrators for freedom to maintain order in the schools.' T.L.O."

http://www.youthrights.org/search.shtml

While this decision annoys me and frankly astounds and concerns me, its the ruling decision of the time - I assume. I despise judicial activism, however, one has to see the logical argument that it was for the greater good in this case, and is almost always. I still hate the idea, but I understand the merits behind it.

[maxama10]

^^^ LOL Lohman446.

No, you're not. Sorry, but you don't know squat. I don't care how 'grown up' a person thinks they are or how mature they think they are, but you don't really begin to understand jack until you're about 30 with kids, two car payments, a mortgage, and the #1 priority in finding a job is whether or not you get good insurance (hooray dental!) for your family.

Everybody thinks they're a genius when they're 18. When you're 22 you realize that that 18 year old you used to be was a moron. When you're 25 you'll realize that the 22 year old you used to be was a moron. When you're 30 you'll realize that you didn't know nearly as much as you thought you did when you were 25.

Apologize to the principal, ask your mother to pick up the flash drive, and suck it up and move on. You will get ZERO respect challenging your school district. It doesn't matter whether or not you think it is fair, in 2005, post-Columbine, post-9/11, your school can do whatever they please with your stuff while you are on school property. Whether it is your bookbag, your lunchbox, your flash drive, or your car, your school has the authority to search and seize it if given cause. You've been given an easy alternative for resolving this situation amicably and you're throwing it away.

The school's course for dealing with this behaviour will ultimately be to expel you. If you're under 18 you'll have to go to court, where a merciless judge will not have any sympathy for you and you'll be ordered to see both a probation officer and possibly a psychiatrist who specializes in family care, once or even twice a week for each. If you're over 18 you'll skip all that, but either way you'll wind-up having to spend several hundred on correspondence courses or settle for a GED, which won't get you a job anywhere worthwhile. Damaging any positive relationship with your principal or school administration won't help you get to college either.

By your post profile you're what? 15 or 16?

I've got news for you, I have seen thousands upon thousands of teenage kids in the halls of my county court building. All of them thought they could change things too. You will lose if you pursue this. I guarantee it. There are multiple outcomes, but all of them will be very, very bad for you longterm.

and i suppose according to that in two years youll think back and think how stupid you are?

[Lohman446]

and i suppose according to that in two years youll think back and think how stupid you are?

Antedoctially (sp) speaking he is more right than you would like to know. I was probably 23-25 before I realized I was not nearly as smart as I thought I was when I was a teenager.

[bleachit]

Apparently Supreme Court Justice Scalia found it written in there somewhere

http://www.youthrights.org/search.shtml

While this decision annoys me and frankly astounds and concerns me, its the ruling decision of the time - I assume. I despise judicial activism, however, one has to see the logical argument that it was for the greater good in this case, and is almost always. I still hate the idea, but I understand the merits behind it.

thats shenanigans... thats why there is reasonable suspicion... friggin random searching everyone based on nothing.... that, imo, is going too far.

[Dryden]

and i suppose according to that in two years youll think back and think how stupid you are?

Typical response from another 16 year old smart aleck.

"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something."
-- Plato

[Eric Cartman]

Antedoctially (sp) speaking he is more right than you would like to know. I was probably 23-25 before I realized I was not nearly as smart as I thought I was when I was a teenager.

You're absolutely correct (aside from your spelling of anecdotally ), but this is one of those truths that you simply have to live through to understand or accept. When I was 16 I knew everything worth knowing in the world. I've spent the last 19 years realizing just how wrong I was... and being greatful that I never got a Def Leppard tattoo

[Lohman446]

thats shenanigans... thats why there is reasonable suspicion... friggin random searching everyone based on nothing.... that, imo, is going too far.

100% agreed. The Constitution means nothing if we do not honor it and abide by it. I don't care what activist ruling says the fourth amendment had a meaning, and it was to prevent creative ways to overrun our base rights.

[slade]

The police can't search your car without a warrent unless you wave your rights. Maybie in your state some lower court decided that it was constitutional for them to do so but any half decent lawer should be able to get that law shot down. More than likely your teacher says that to scare you into not having anything in your car or to wave your rights should the police want to check.

Now if you signed a student code of conduct or anything like that without reading it you may have waved your rights. But all you have to do is tell the police officer you don't want them in your car and the police have to stop. Now the school can penalize you for violating the code of conduct but you arn't in any legal trouble.

its a state law. my teacher isnt trying to scare us. he got into the conversation saying basically, "this is what the law in massachusetts says. no one trusts teenagers and this law is abusing your rights, and no one has challenged it yet." and i cant remember ever signing a code of conduct for the school, they just take one class a year to go over the code of conduct.

Not exactly true... schools need reasonable suspicion as opposed to probable cause in order to conduct a search. Police can search if the administration of the school presents reasonable suspicion and allows them to.. or I think the administration has to conduct the search but the police can be present. either way reasonable suspicion is required. randomly searching without cause or suspicion is not allowed...

Cops can bring in dogs to sniff for whatever with administrations permission, and if they get a hit on a car or locker, its fair game.

not in massachusetts, apparently.

[stop whining buy a mag]

This thread is rather upsetting. It still appalls me today to find that people will treat teenagers like they are 5 years old when the truth is they are more mature than most adults.

A teenager is not stupid/immature because he or she is in highschoo. You do learn more as you become older but when a person says immature, it infers that compared to the general population they act like little kids.

The phrase "respect your elders" is the worst attempt at calling younger people idiots. Just because you are older than someone does not mean you are better. I recently had a conference with my Assistant Principal about punishing me for skipping. There's a lot of background to it but in the end he told me that I would most likely be suspended. I gave him a blank stare for a few seconds and asked him what I had done wrong. He told me I had "attempted to leave campus which is against school policy". I then asked him for a definition of suspension. His exact words were "a punishment in which a student is not allowed on campus for an allotted amount of time". I put 2 and 2 together for him and told him what was so hypocritical about this. Against school policy, I attempted to leave campus. Now coming on to school campus would be against school policy. He thought about it for a second and explained to me how my parents would react to it. I explained to him that if my parents reacted in a negative way, I'd be sitting in my room all day most likely sleeping. Sounds like an amazing punishment to me.

Echo, you seem very mature and knowledgable about your rights. Using profanity does hurt your case a little (because it is against school policy, I do not care for respect) but what the principal did was illegal as long as the files in your flash drive did not contain anything seemingly malicious. File the complaint.

[Lohman446]

its a state law. my teacher isnt trying to scare us. he got into the conversation saying basically, "this is what the law in massachusetts says. no one trusts teenagers and this law is abusing your rights, and no one has challenged it yet." and i cant remember ever signing a code of conduct for the school, they just take one class a year to go over the code of conduct.


not in massachusetts, apparently.

Lockers are always fair game because of technical ownership, and it appears if your in the school so is your bag / person. What a crock. That being said, I don't think your vehicle ever is... Obviously I don't totally know that. I guess it comes down to, is the administrator acting as your guardian with your parents not present (and everyone elses) or is he/she acting as an agent of the state. If they are not an agent of the state then a lot of your rights just left...

[stop whining buy a mag]

not in massachusetts, apparently.

FYI, federal laws (Constitution) trump state and local laws. Hence, "marijuana legalized in Denver" is not as true as it sounds. You will not be charged locally if you follow that law but you could be charged under the federal laws for marijuana.

[Lohman446]

This thread is rather upsetting. It still appalls me today to find that people will treat teenagers like they are 5 years old when the truth is they are more mature than most adults.

A teenager is not stupid/immature because he or she is in highschoo. You do learn more as you become older but when a person says immature, it infers that compared to the general population they act like little kids.

The phrase "respect your elders" is the worst attempt at calling younger people idiots. Just because you are older than someone does not mean you are better. I recently had a conference with my Assistant Principal about punishing me for skipping. There's a lot of background to it but in the end he told me that I would most likely be suspended. I gave him a blank stare for a few seconds and asked him what I had done wrong. He told me I had "attempted to leave campus which is against school policy". I then asked him for a definition of suspension. His exact words were "a punishment in which a student is not allowed on campus for an allotted amount of time". I put 2 and 2 together for him and told him what was so hypocritical about this. Against school policy, I attempted to leave campus. Now coming on to school campus would be against school policy. He thought about it for a second and explained to me how my parents would react to it. I explained to him that if my parents reacted in a negative way, I'd be sitting in my room all day most likely sleeping. Sounds like an amazing punishment to me.

Echo, you seem very mature and knowledgable about your rights. Using profanity does hurt your case a little (because it is against school policy, I do not care for respect) but what the principal did was illegal as long as the files in your flash drive did not contain anything seemingly malicious. File the complaint.

Did you read the thread? Anyone who is going to cuss someone for disrespecting them looses the right to expect treatment as a mature person. Sorry...

As for you outwitting your principal

When I was 16 I knew everything worth knowing in the world. I've spent the last 19 years realizing just how wrong I was... and being greatful that I never got a Def Leppard tattoo

Trust me, when 99% of adults will tell you this, you are not some great exception, its part of life. I'm sorry, it just is and eventually you learn it. Though, the same as most of us were, telling you this will not convince you, its something you learn in time.