Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« We Have Established That | Anti-"Socialized Medicine" = Anti-F… »

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Drugs Go Ahead, Peek in the Girl's Underwear

Posted by Dominic Holden on Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 2:15 PM

The Supreme Court is listening to arguments today in the case of a girl who was strip searched by middle-school officials looking for drugs. Another student accused the girl of having white pills, which were Ibuprofen but were never found. But even though the drugs weren't really drugs and the school officials had no reason to believe the girl was hiding drugs under her clothes, the justices appear to be supporting the right for school officials to strip search a student anytime they choose. From the LA Times:

For a moment, Justice David H. Souter tried to put himself in the mind of the vice principal who ordered the strip search of Savana Redding. The year before, a middle-school student had become violently ill after taking mysterious pills at school. The official may have feared a repeat.

"Better embarrassment [of one student] than the risk of violent sickness and death," Souter said.

A lawyer for the Safford Unified School District urged the justices to rule that school officials have broad authority to search students. The vice principal in this case had been told some students had pills, and they were to be passed around at lunchtime. Based on that report, "he was entitled to search any place where contraband might reasonably be found," said Matthew Wright, district's lawyer.

What about a "body cavity search?" asked Justice Antonin Scalia.

Wright replied that no school official would undertake such a search, but he insisted it would be legal.

The school officials argue that they need to prevent students from dying on their watch. I'm with 'em on that one. But I'm having a hard time believing it's ever necessary to strip search a kid. Detain a kid, sure. Pat a kid down for weapons, sure. Peek in her underwear or search her body cavity based on the tip of another student? Hell no. If the student is reasonably believed to be carrying heroin or a gun, call the cops. Teachers aren't cops and they shouldn't act like them.

Comments (22) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

had this been policy at my school I would have been snitching left and right, 10 years later I'd still be laughing about people I didn't like having their butt holes looked at by Mr. Mcbride.

Posted by Little Red Ryan Hood on April 21, 2009 at 2:17 PM

We're going to need a speculum for this, Nurse Ratchet. And a video camera.

Posted by Fnarf on April 21, 2009 at 2:20 PM

Jesus fucking christ I am so glad I'm not a teenager in this era.

Posted by genevieve on April 21, 2009 at 2:26 PM

I think I'd set it up with my friends to snitch on a few of 'em at the same time, ensuring that they'd all had Taco Bell or prunes and asparagus the night before.

Posted by Banna on April 21, 2009 at 2:28 PM

I agree with Genevieve. I'm glad that social-networking sites didn't really blow up until after I graduated high school, and I'm glad I didn't have a digital camera/cell phone until I was of legal age, because it's fair to assume I would have texted a picture of my boobs to someone and made us both "child pornographers." So ridiculous.

Posted by Aislinn on April 21, 2009 at 2:31 PM

Agreed. Teachers and school nurses should under no circumstances be performing strip searches or cavity searches. If the threat is perceived as being that severe, the police need to be called.

Posted by Hernandez on April 21, 2009 at 2:40 PM

And so another bunch of families will pull out of the public schools to someplace that can promise not to put their fingers in their children's cooters, and the public schools fall further again.

Posted by Fnarf on April 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM

I had a kid in my class that was accused of taking extasy during class, the teacher grabbed the student in the middle of the class and called the cops. They couldn't find the drugs until they talked to a few students, they were 'hiding' in a corner, however I don't think for a moment my principal thought he had some kind of legal right to strip search him if he couldn't find any drugs. I don't give a fuck what age you are, the 4th amendment still applies.

Posted by Chris on April 21, 2009 at 2:42 PM

Shouldn't the words "PROBABLE CAUSE" be featured more prominently in this discussion?

Or is the anonymous tip being included in American justice as all the evidence we need from here on out?

Posted by Ackham on April 21, 2009 at 2:46 PM

Strip search for Ibuprofen? Really?

I think it was on Slog where we also read about the threat of expulsion for the student who, instead of storing it with the school nurse, too a self-dispensed birth control pill.

Damn! Included in school's "zero-tolerance" policies seems to be zero tolerance for administrative judgement.

Posted by oneway on April 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

I agree-- if they're that worried, call the police and the kid's parents. Don't have teachers strip search them at school.

Posted by vitaminwater on April 21, 2009 at 2:50 PM

The big issue with Savana and searches like this is (as other commenters note in part) the parents should have been called and the police. School officials without the parents present should not be engaged in interrogation or personal searches. When I was in high school lo many years ago, our district's students' rights handbook said a student should always have parents present if any disciplinary matter was under discussion. Students couldn't be questioned privately. And administrators who violated this role were, in fact, held to account.

Posted by Glenn Fleishman on April 21, 2009 at 3:14 PM

@9 right on the money. I heard about this on NPR and the "evidence" was pure hearsay. In addition, the girl had no record of problems at the school--their response was that this was not proof of her good behavior, just evidence that she had never been caught.

Unfortunately, if you look at SCOTUS decisions about freedom of speech, you get the impression that kids rights are not protected by the constitution.

The lawyer/mouthpiece for the district said that the school was overrun with drugs and if people want to solve this problem, they will have to accept loss of privacy. Same tyrannical bullshit we've been hearing for years to justify illegal searches.

Posted by Westside forever on April 21, 2009 at 3:20 PM

I truly, truly hope the next kid who is subjected to this turns right around and has the offending teacher charged with sexual assault. Because frankly, that's what it is.

Posted by Anonymouse on April 21, 2009 at 4:08 PM

The kid is fucked. If Souter is coming down on the school's side, there's no way Kennedy is gonna rule for greater privacy. Much like the ruling on eminent domain for private gain, this is one where the states are going to have to write their own protections against this unconscionable bullshit.

Posted by Gitai on April 21, 2009 at 4:33 PM

I think we should make a trade.

If we can extradite the Gang of Five at the USSC to The Hague for complicity in War Crimes, along with their clerks like John Yoo and the rest of the Bush architects of torture, they can get a pass on this one.

After all, the end justifies the means, right Clarence Thomas?

Posted by Will in Seattle on April 21, 2009 at 4:37 PM

What whitebread school did you go to?

Posted by fag on April 21, 2009 at 5:24 PM

@8: don't be silly. Children are cattle, not people!

Posted by guy on April 21, 2009 at 5:25 PM

o my god! how old is she? i think it's pretty severe sexual abuse to force a minor to disrobe in front of those who aren't police officers of the same gender after a full arrest process or emergency medical staff. i'm so disgusted i'm gagging.

Posted by tobes on April 21, 2009 at 5:40 PM

*sigh*

Unfortunately, the court is going to side with the school. How do I know? Because this happened at my school a good 15 years earlier. (I wasn't a student at the time, already graduated) The principal heard a rumor a student stole 5 dollars and called her cop buddy and a couple of other admin and strip searched a bunch of girls. Bare naked in the halls along with a groping. Turns out it was just mean spirited spite from another girl who "whoops" misplaced the money. The girls' parents sued and the case was kicked out because of "in loco parentis". The court claimed students in school weren't protected by the constitution.

Posted by yucca flower on April 21, 2009 at 6:11 PM

@20 i feel sick.

Posted by quick bit of empathy on April 21, 2009 at 8:59 PM

#18

think again
kids are suitcases, not cattle

this court will side with the school, the authority of the school, remember, Bush appointees, conservatives

my mom would have had a fist fight or two over such shit

have a great mommie to say the least

Posted by George on April 22, 2009 at 6:59 AM