Strip search of teen ruled illegal

Real Life Events.

Go off topic and I will break you!

Moderator: Dictators in Training

Strip search of teen ruled illegal

Postby Arlos » Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:08 am

Remember that thread we had a while back, about the SCOTUS reviewing whether or not it was legal to strip-search that 13-year old because she was accused of having Advil? Well, other than wackmeister Thomas, the court just ruled the search was indeed illegal, on an 8-1 vote.

Supreme Court: Strip search of Arizona middle school girl illegal

By Jesse J. Holland

Associated Press
Posted: 06/25/2009 08:48:51 AM PDT
Updated: 06/25/2009 08:48:56 AM PDT

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a school's strip search of an Arizona teenage girl accused of having prescription-strength ibuprofen was illegal.

In an 8-1 ruling, the justices said school officials violated the law with their search of Savana Redding in the rural eastern Arizona town of Safford.

Redding, who now attends college, was 13 when officials at Safford Middle School ordered her to remove her clothes and shake out her underwear because they were looking for pills — the equivalent of two Advils. The district bans prescription and over-the-counter drugs and the school was acting on a tip from another student.

"What was missing from the suspected facts that pointed to Savana was any indication of danger to the students from the power of the drugs or their quantity, and any reason to suppose that Savana was carrying pills in her underwear," Justice David Souter wrote in the majority opinion. "We think that the combination of these deficiencies was fatal to finding the search reasonable."

In a dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas found the search legal and said the court previously had given school officials "considerable leeway" under the Fourth Amendment in school settings.

Officials had searched the girl's backpack and found nothing, Thomas said. "It was eminently reasonable to conclude the backpack was empty because Redding was secreting the pills in a place she thought no one would look,"

Thomas said.

Thomas warned that the majority's decision could backfire. "Redding would not have been the first person to conceal pills in her undergarments," he said. "Nor will she be the last after today's decision, which announces the safest place to secrete contraband in school."

The court also ruled the officials cannot be held liable in a lawsuit for the search. Different judges around the nation have come to different conclusions about immunity for school officials in strip searches, which leads the Supreme Court to "counsel doubt that we were sufficiently clear in the prior statement of law," Souter said.

"We think these differences of opinion from our own are substantial enough to require immunity for the school officials in this case," Souter said.

The justices also said the lower courts would have to determine whether the Safford United School District No. 1 could be held liable.

A schoolmate had accused Redding, then an eighth-grade student, of giving her pills.

The school's vice principal, Kerry Wilson, took Redding to his office to search her backpack. When nothing was found, Redding was taken to a nurse's office where she says she was ordered to take off her shirt and pants. Redding said they then told her to move her bra to the side and to stretch her underwear waistband, exposing her breasts and pelvic area. No pills were found.

A federal magistrate dismissed a suit by Redding and her mother, April. An appeals panel agreed that the search didn't violate her rights. But last July, a full panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the search was "an invasion of constitutional rights" and that Wilson could be found personally liable.

Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented from the portion of the ruling saying that Wilson could not be held financially liable.

"Wilson's treatment of Redding was abusive and it was not reasonable for him to believe that the law permitted it," Ginsburg said.

The case is Safford Unified School District v. April Redding, 08-479.


-Arlos
User avatar
Arlos
Admin Abuse Squad
Admin Abuse Squad
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:39 pm

Re: Strip search of teen ruled illegal

Postby Nusk » Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:47 pm

thomas was a fail on this... should of been 9-0

this was nothing more than a witch hunt even down to a girl who cried wolf just because she wanted another girl to get into trouble.
Image
User avatar
Nusk
NT Froglok
NT Froglok
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:10 pm

Re: Strip search of teen ruled illegal

Postby ClakarEQ » Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:51 pm

/agree 100% I'm was a bit surprised it wasn't 9-0.
ClakarEQ
NT Traveller
NT Traveller
 
Posts: 2080
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:46 pm

Re: Strip search of teen ruled illegal

Postby Lueyen » Thu Jun 25, 2009 3:22 pm

I'm glad it turned out the way it did. I agree it should have been 9-0. I should go read Thomas's opinion in it's entirety before stating this, but it sure sounds to me like he was acting as an activist instead of a constructionist on this one, and I have no use for the former regardless of their social political views.
Raymond S. Kraft wrote:The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.

Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
User avatar
Lueyen
Dictator in Training
Dictator in Training
 
Posts: 1793
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 2:57 pm


Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests