YES! US supreme court makes a correct rulling!

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
cnn

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A former middle-school student who was strip-searched by school officials looking for ibuprofen pain medication won a partial victory of her Supreme Court appeal Thursday in a case testing the discretion of officials to ensure classroom safety.

Savana Redding was 13 when administrators suspected that she was carrying banned drugs.

No medication was found, and she later sued.

The justices concluded that the search was unreasonable but that individual school administrators could not be sued.

The larger issue of whether a campus setting traditionally gives schools greater authority over students suspected of illegal activity than police are allowed was not addressed fully by the divided court.

"Savana's subjective expectation of privacy against such a search is inherent in her account of it as embarrassing, frightening and humiliating," wrote Justice David Souter for the majority, likely his last opinion before he steps down from the bench next week.

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

Whether the school district would be liable was not an issue before the high court.

Redding was an eighth-grade honor student in 2003, with no history of disciplinary problems at Safford Middle School, about 127 miles from Tucson, Arizona.

During an investigation into pills found at the school, a student told the vice principal that Redding had given her prescription-strength 400-milligram ibuprofen pills.

The school had a near-zero-tolerance policy for all prescription and over-the-counter medication, including the ibuprofen, without prior written permission.

Redding was pulled from class by Vice Principal Kerry Wilson, escorted to an office and confronted with the evidence. The girl denied the accusations.

A search of Redding's backpack found nothing. A strip search was conducted by Wilson's assistant and a school nurse, both females.

Redding was ordered to strip to her underwear and to pull on the elastic of the underwear, so any hidden pills might fall out, according to court records. No drugs were found.

"The strip search was the most humiliating experience I have ever had," Redding said in an affidavit. "I held my head down so that they could not see that I was about to cry."

Souter said Wilson initially had "sufficient suspicion" to justify searching the girl's backpack and outer clothing. But when no contraband was found, the officials went too far by continuing the search of her underwear.

With the help of the American Civil Liberties Union, Redding and her family sued, and a federal appeals court in San Francisco ruled against the school, calling the search "traumatizing" and illegal. That court said the school went too far in its effort to create a drug- and crime-free classroom.

The Supreme Court found little agreement on key issues. Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg agreed that the search was illegal but would have also made individual officials liable for damages by Redding.

"Wilson's treatment of Redding was abusive, and it was not reasonable for him to believe that the law permitted it," said Ginsburg, who was especially forceful oral arguments in April criticizing the school's actions.

But Justice Clarence Thomas took the opposite view: that administrators deserved immunity but that the search was permissible.

"Preservation of order, discipline and safety in public schools is simply not the domain of the Constitution," he said. "And, common sense is not a judicial monopoly or a constitutional imperative."

In 1985, the high court allowed the search of a student's purse after she was suspected of hiding cigarettes. Such a search was permitted if there were "reasonable" grounds for believing that it would turn up evidence and when the search was not "excessively intrusive."

Opinions in 1995 and 2001 allowed schools to conduct random drug testing of high school athletes and those participating in other extracurricular activities.

The court is being asked to clarify the extent of student rights involving searches and the discretion of officials regarding those they have responsibility over.

Redding, now 19, said in April that she has never gotten over her experience.

"Before it happened, I loved school, loved everything about it. You know, I had a 4.0 GPA honor roll, and now, well, afterwards I never wanted to go to school again."

She is attending college and living at home in Arizona.




while not perfect rulling it is a damn good one. common sense rules at least! strip searching a 13 yr old should never happen in school.

Good for them!

 

scott916

Platinum Member
Mar 2, 2005
2,906
0
71
Yeah, that's some sick shit, ESPECIALLY for just some fuckin ibuprofen. Obvious that at least one person involved was pushing for the strip search in hopes of seeing her naked.
 

xanis

Lifer
Sep 11, 2005
17,571
8
0
Yeah, that search went WAY too far. Searching a backpack or purse is one thing, searching the student's body is another.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: xeemzor
Clarence Thomas is such a tool.

no shit. how the fuck can anyone think that strip searching a 13 yr old girl was ok? with no proof and no real authority there.

really i see this ruleing as a no brainer. stevens nailed it with this quote : "I have long believed that it does not require a constitutional scholar to conclude that a nude search of a 13-year-old child is an invasion of constitutional rights of some magnitude,"

well duh.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Good job. Now she can go back to stripping down to her undies where it's appropriate, on youtube.

....I'll go have a seat over there.


And once again those commies at the ACLU fighting to prevent our schools from administering justice.
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,231
118
116
Damn, that's messed up. Sounds like someone deserves a cockpunch.

KT
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,231
118
116
Originally posted by: CRXican
strip search is naked

doesn't say she was naked

Give me a fucking break. Argue semantics, but down to her underwear and having to move the elastic of the underwear aside is a fucking stripsearch. She's 13 for christ's sake. :disgust:

KT
 

Vette73

Lifer
Jul 5, 2000
21,503
9
0
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: xeemzor
Clarence Thomas is such a tool.

no shit. how the fuck can anyone think that strip searching a 13 yr old girl was ok? with no proof and no real authority there.

really i see this ruleing as a no brainer. stevens nailed it with this quote : "I have long believed that it does not require a constitutional scholar to conclude that a nude search of a 13-year-old child is an invasion of constitutional rights of some magnitude,"

well duh.

"Preservation of order, discipline and safety in public schools is simply not the domain of the Constitution,"


Yep school property = no constitution protection... wait what? :confused:


Thomas is one of the worst to ever be on the SC.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: CRXican
strip search is naked

doesn't say she was naked

she was ordered to remove her clothes. some do mention she kept on her underwear and bra. SO FUCKING WHAT.

you do not humilate a 13 yr old and force her to strip to her bra and underwear over a fuckign ibuprofen.


hell you don't do that to anyone.


edit; Oh she did have to give over her bra and underwear to 2 female teachers to be searchecd. IT is nto clear if the male was in the room at that time (havent seen anything saying if he was) but it has been said he was in the room when she was forced to get into her bra nd underwear.
 

Sumguy

Golden Member
Jun 2, 2007
1,409
0
0
I support this! Who knows what she could have done with those ibuprofen!

Why, she might have distributed some to a few mildly sick classmates! Think of the children!
 

hanoverphist

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2006
9,867
23
76
Originally posted by: CRXican
strip search is naked

doesn't say she was naked

strip means take clothes off. she was down to undies, that had to involve taking some amount of clothing off.

the fact that this happened pisses me off. without calling the parents first REALLY pisses me off.
 

oiprocs

Diamond Member
Jun 20, 2001
3,780
2
0
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: xeemzor
Clarence Thomas is such a tool.

no shit. how the fuck can anyone think that strip searching a 13 yr old girl was ok? with no proof and no real authority there.

really i see this ruleing as a no brainer. stevens nailed it with this quote : "I have long believed that it does not require a constitutional scholar to conclude that a nude search of a 13-year-old child is an invasion of constitutional rights of some magnitude,"

well duh.

"Preservation of order, discipline and safety in public schools is simply not the domain of the Constitution,"


Yep school property = no constitution protection... wait what? :confused:


Thomas is one of the worst to ever be on the SC.

Is Thomas black?
 

skace

Lifer
Jan 23, 2001
14,488
7
81
What I wonder is, 2 females strip searched her, but where was everyone else? Are we sure nobody had any visuals of her during this process? Was it done in a locker room or somewhere questionable like a class room or even the principles office? And why 2 people? The nurse couldn't handle it on her own?
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: hanoverphist
Originally posted by: CRXican
strip search is naked

doesn't say she was naked

strip means take clothes off. she was down to undies, that had to involve taking some amount of clothing off.

the fact that this happened pisses me off. without calling the parents first REALLY pisses me off.

actually she did have to give up her underwear and bra to be searched. But i havent found something saying for sure if the Vice Princapal was in the room at that time. But he was in the room when she was forced to strip down to her panties and underwear.

Also they NEVER called the parents the whole time.
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,897
3,860
136
Originally posted by: xeemzor
Clarence Thomas is such a tool.

This

"Preservation of order, discipline and safety in public schools is simply not the domain of the Constitution," he said. "And, common sense is not a judicial monopoly or a constitutional imperative."

Sounds like ultra-fascist loony-tunes code for "citizens surrender all civil rights at the doors of public schools, and must submit themselves to the depraved whims of anyone in authority."
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,994
779
126
Holy shit, not even Scalia sided with Thomas.

What a fucking tool.

He's probably busy asking who put the pubic hair in his coke.

 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Good. But the school needs to be sued to holy hell. They only got half the ruling correct. This needs to be an example that all this zero tolerance BS is wrong.
 

Dumac

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2005
9,391
1
0
Originally posted by: spidey07
Good. But the school needs to be sued to holy hell. They only got half the ruling correct. This needs to be an example that all this zero tolerance BS is wrong.

I dunno why America is so weird about drugs..
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Originally posted by: Dumac
Originally posted by: spidey07
Good. But the school needs to be sued to holy hell. They only got half the ruling correct. This needs to be an example that all this zero tolerance BS is wrong.

I dunno why America is so weird about drugs..

This somewhat recent crackdown came from kids stealing pills (prescription) from their parents and passing them out at school.