13 yr old strip search

[Homicidalheathen]

Who cares if she hides Ibphrophen in her undies? WTF? It could have been anyone you can't strip search them all...xray them upon entering.....? That and, being as how I am deathly allergic to that crap and have (when I was younger) bought drugs illegally in school...if your kid does that...well its their problem and yours not the schools I don't think. Any kid who takes more than one of anything before they know how their body will react...is dumb. Survival of the fittest. And if its illegal...take a half. Wait 2 hours, (not 1) and take the other half. Buy 2 so you can do this till you get safely high or relieved. I don't think the drug problem will go away as women can hide it in their snatch...ass...whatever. So education is the best way.

Student Strip Search Illegal

School Violated Teen Girl's Rights, Supreme Court Rules

Arizona school officials violated the constitutional rights of a 13-year-old girl when they strip-searched her on the suspicion she might be hiding ibuprofen in her underwear, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday. The decision put school districts on notice that such searches are "categorically distinct" from other efforts to combat illegal drugs.

In a case that had drawn attention from educators, parents and civil libertarians across the country, the court ruled 8 to 1 that such an intrusive search without the threat of a clear danger to other students violated the Constitution's protections against unreasonable search or seizure.

Justice David H. Souter, writing perhaps his final opinion for the court, said that in the search of Savana Redding, now a 19-year-old college student, school officials overreacted to vague accusations that Redding was violating school policy by possessing the ibuprofen, equivalent to two tablets of Advil.

What was missing, Souter wrote, "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."

It was reasonable to search the girl's backpack and outer clothes, but Safford Middle School administrators made a "quantum leap" in taking the next step, the opinion said. "The meaning of such a search, and the degradation its subject may reasonably feel, place a search that intrusive in a category of its own demanding its own specific suspicions," Souter wrote.

Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenter. "Judges are not qualified to second-guess the best manner for maintaining quiet and order in the school environment," he wrote.

He said administrators were only being logical in searching the girl. "Redding would not have been the first person to conceal pills in her undergarments," he wrote. "Nor will she be the last after today's decision, which announces the safest place to secrete contraband in school."

The court's virtual unanimity was in contrast to the intense oral argument that seemed to exasperate the court's only female member, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She later said her male colleagues seemed not to appreciate the trauma such a search would have on a developing adolescent.

"They have never been a 13-year-old girl," she told USA Today when asked about her colleagues' comments during the arguments. "It's a very sensitive age for a girl. I didn't think that my colleagues, some of them, quite understood."

But yesterday's opinion recognized just that. "Changing for gym is getting ready for play," Souter wrote. "Exposing for a search is responding to an accusation reserved for suspected wrongdoers" and is so degrading that a number of states and school districts have banned strip searches. The Washington region's two largest school districts are among them.

Redding said the decision "feels fantastic." She described herself as shy and "not a good public speaker," but said the long legal battle "was to make sure it didn't happen to anyone else."

The case, Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding, began when another student was found with prescription-strength ibuprofen and said she received it from Redding.

Safford Middle School assistant principal Kerry Wilson pulled the quiet honors student out of class, and she consented in his office to a search of her backpack and outer clothes. When that turned up no pills, he had a school nurse take Redding to her office, where she was told to remove her clothes, shake out her bra and pull her underwear away from her body, exposing her breasts and pelvic area.

No drugs were found, and Redding said she was so humiliated by the incident that she never returned to the school. Her mother filed suit against the school district, as well as Wilson.

After years of legal proceedings, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit eventually ruled in her favor.

Justices based their view on the court's warning in a 1985 case that, although school officials have leeway in deciding when searches of students are reasonable, the officials may not employ searches "excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction."

Lower courts have had trouble deciding when that standard applies, Souter wrote, so Wilson should not be held personally liable for the incident. The court ruled, though, that Redding's suit could proceed against the school district.

Ginsburg and Justice John Paul Stevens criticized the decision to remove Wilson from the suit, saying he should have known the search violated Redding's rights.

"Abuse of authority of that order should not be shielded by official immunity," Ginsburg wrote.

Redding's attorney, Adam Wolf of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the court made clear that strip searches would be used only in "extraordinary circumstances" and that "the justices saw what the general public saw: that these school officials overreacted and traumatized a young girl."

Francisco M. Negrón Jr., general counsel for the National School Boards Association, said he was glad the court recognized that the school officials had acted "in good faith." But he said the decision did not provide clear guidelines about how specific the accusation must be, or how dangerous the alleged drugs, before school officials employ such an intrusive search.

"I think there will be more litigation," he said.

But many states and school boards, including some in the Washington area, are simply not allowing strip searches.

The policy in Fairfax County, for instance, specifies that "personal searches may extend to pockets; and to the removal and search of outer garments such as jackets, coats, sweaters, or shoes; and to items such as pocketbooks or backpacks." In Montgomery County, officials with the Department of School Safety and Security said searches are limited to outer clothing and pockets. The "preferred method is self-search," where a student is told what to remove, said school system spokeswoman Kate Harrison. A third person is always present for any search, she said.

Staff writer Michael Alison Chandler contributed to this report.

[Rev.Reverence]

Holy shit! Ibu-fuckin'-profin?

[StormKnight (1)]

I believe that nowadays, unless there is paperwork in the nurse's office, *nothing* in the form of pharmaceuticals is allowed in schools.

Rules made to stop the worst case scenarios.

The fact this was even considered stinks, let alone having it done.

[Homicidalheathen]

Yah I guess some schools don't want u to take peanuts in either...I don't think anyone is airborn allergic they are just afraid the kid won't be able to help himself...at least thats what happened at Clinton once, they sent a note home saying no peanut products at school which includes some cereal bars.

[pomba gira]

I believe that nowadays, unless there is paperwork in the nurse's office, *nothing* in the form of pharmaceuticals is allowed in schools.

Rules made to stop the worst case scenarios.

The fact this was even considered stinks, let alone having it done.

This is correct... if a child shows up in class with any kind of RX or OTC meds, you send her to the office and let them deal with it. BUT most school administrators have the sense to respond in different ways to different situations. Something like ibuprofen does not warrant humiliating a child (and exposing your district to legal action). If an illegal or dangerous substance is involved, you call the police and let them handle it. You certainly call the parents before taking any kind of extreme action. And this girl was a shy little honor student, not a known troublemaker... so some really poor choices were made by the AP. Sounds to me like he went into automatic "this kid is challenging my authority" power struggle mode, and nothing good ever comes of that.

And Clarence Thomas needs to be horsewhipped for the implication that this decision will have kids flocking to school with massive pharmacopoeias stashed in their bras & drawers. What a dumbass thing to say.

HH, some of these allergies are really hair-trigger. I once subbed in a class where the teacher had to carry an Epi-pen out on the playground at recess, and the kids all had to use hand sanitizer when they came in from lunch/recess. Apparently even a whiff of peanut vapor would send this child into anaphylaxis.

Edited June 26, 2009 by pomba gira

[Destroit]

This is absurd, I'm anti-lawsuit almost all the way, but if I were the parents of this girl this case would definately be a different story. I'd sue the ever-loving shit out of everyone involved, and I hardly EVER stick up for the kids and almost always stick up for teachers (sorry parents, 90% of the time your kid is the one being the little shit, not the teacher). If that says anything. Edited June 26, 2009 by Chernobyl

[TygerLili]

Ibuprofen is not an illegal drug. All it takes is a note from one of the girls parents saying that it's ok for their daughter to take ibuprofen. Rather than strip searching the poor girl, why didn't the principal just call her parents? I usually try hard to see both points of view for things like this, but jeez!

[TheOsakaKoneko]

Ibuprofen? HAHAHA Soooo dumb.

But the idea that now kids know where to hide stuff is not a silly one...if kids know they have 0 chance of being strip searched, they know exactly where they can hide stuff and have it not found. ::shrug::

It was the right decision though, but not one that should have had to have been made...not over ibuprofen.

[Destroit]

Ibuprofen is not an illegal drug. All it takes is a note from one of the girls parents saying that it's ok for their daughter to take ibuprofen. Rather than strip searching the poor girl, why didn't the principal just call her parents? I usually try hard to see both points of view for things like this, but jeez!

Because in public schools now they have an absolutely ZERO tolerance for any substance like this at all. Personally, I think that is retarded...when will school administrators realize that the more freedom you TAKE away from kids the more they are going to rebel? And rightfully so! We treat teenagers like they're five now...and low and behold, most of them act like five year olds because of it. Coincidence? I think not... I find it funny how in modern times, MANY administrations are absolutely clueless on psychology and how children/adolescents think and function, and then make judgements and rules based on their misconceptions.

Glad I'm not even bringing any children into this world which is turning to shit faster than an avalanche coming down a mountain.

[candyman]

Huh...strange things are happening in schools these days...glad I am done with that highschool crap but sad to see that they are turning colleges into highschools now too!

Does Ibuprofen do anything different if taken in your pants?

[Simon Bar Sinister]

if anyone had done that to my niece, their fucking body would never be found

[pomba gira]

Because in public schools now they have an absolutely ZERO tolerance for any substance like this at all. Personally, I think that is retarded...when will school administrators realize that the more freedom you TAKE away from kids the more they are going to rebel? And rightfully so! We treat teenagers like they're five now...and low and behold, most of them act like five year olds because of it. Coincidence? I think not... I find it funny how in modern times, MANY administrations are absolutely clueless on psychology and how children/adolescents think and function, and then make judgements and rules based on their misconceptions.

Glad I'm not even bringing any children into this world which is turning to shit faster than an avalanche coming down a mountain.

It's not a question of "freedom", it's a liability issue. If Shantiniya brings some aspirin to school and gives it to Dacoria, who then succumbs to an allergic reaction, Dacoria's parents will then turn around and sue the shit out of the school district. Juries tend to be more sympathetic to grieving parents than to any arguments for "common sense".

I do agree about treating teenagers like they're incapable of making any decisions on their own. I think the whole bit of turning adolescence into an extended childhood has done some really bad things to Western society, this country in particular. Kids do their best to live up to the expectations of the adults around them, so if you expect that they can't be trusted with any kind of personal responsibility... guess what you're gonna get?

[Destroit]

It's not a question of "freedom", it's a liability issue. If Shantiniya brings some aspirin to school and gives it to Dacoria, who then succumbs to an allergic reaction, Dacoria's parents will then turn around and sue the shit out of the school district. Juries tend to be more sympathetic to grieving parents than to any arguments for "common sense".

I do agree about treating teenagers like they're incapable of making any decisions on their own. I think the whole bit of turning adolescence into an extended childhood has done some really bad things to Western society, this country in particular. Kids do their best to live up to the expectations of the adults around them, so if you expect that they can't be trusted with any kind of personal responsibility... guess what you're gonna get?

Then Dacoria is retarded and should have known better, imo, and the parents have no right to sue the schools because they're daugher is stupid.

BUT...we do live in America, where the court systems apparantly cater to the stupid, hence why in my original post I made some remark about how I'm usually not for suing, since most lawsuits are made by stupid people to enable them to stay stupid.