Introduction
I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court. Order your copy here: amzn.to/45Wzhur or visit www.iammrbeat.com/merch.html.
In episode 52 of Supreme Court Briefs, two students get caught smoking in the high school restroom, and one denies it, so the principal searches her purse. #supremecourtbriefs #newjerseyvtlo #apgov
Patreon: www.patreon.com/iammrbeat
Donate on Paypal: www.paypal.me/mrbeat
Buy Mr. Beat T-shirts, coffee mugs, etc.: www.iammrbeat.com/merch.html
Reddit: www.reddit.com/r/mrbeat/
Mr. Beat's band: electricneedleroom.us
Mr. Beat on Twitter: twitter.com/beatmastermatt
Mr. Beat on Facebook: www.facebook.com/iammrbeat/
Mr. Beat on Instagram: www.instagram.com/iammrbeat
Mr. Beat's Discord server: discord.gg/waK44fH
Produced by Matt Beat. All images by Matt Beat, found in the public domain, or used under fair use guidelines. Music: "Voyage" by Density and Time.
Check out cool primary sources here:
www.oyez.org/cases/1983/83-712
Other sources used:
constitutioncenter.org/blog/new-jersey-v-t-l-o-the-fourth-amendment-in-public-schools
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey_v._T._L._O.
billofrightsinstitute.org/educate/educator-resources/lessons-plans/landmark-supreme-court-cases-elessons/new-jersey-v-tlo-1985/
www.nytimes.com/1985/01/16/us/high-court-eases-search-strictures-in-public-schools.html
law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/tlo.html
Photo credits (Creative Commons):
Jeff Barton
Piscataway, New Jersey
March 7, 1980
A teacher catches two students smoking in a bathroom of Piscataway High School. Since smoking in the bathroom perhaps obviously went against school rules, the teacher took the two girls to the Principal’s office. Assistant Vice Principal Theodore Choplick interrogated the two girls. One of them admitted to smoking. The other girl, a 14-year old freshman later known simply by her initials to protect her privacy, T.L.O., denied that she had been smoking.
Choplick thought T.L.O. was lying, of course. He forced her to come into his office so he could search her purse. Inside the purse, he found a pack of cigarettes. Next to the cigarettes, in plain view, were rolling papers, which he thought might be used for marijuana, so he kept searching the purse. He also found a pipe, empty plastic bags, a bunch of $1 bills rolled up together, an index card that apparently listed students who owed T.L.O. money, and even two letters seeming to show that T.L.O. was dealing marijuana.
Choplick reported what he found to the police, giving what he found in the purse to them as evidence. T.L.O. later voluntarily confessed to police that she had been selling marijuana at the high school. Based on the confession and seized evidence, the state of New Jersey charged T.L.O. with possession of marijuana in the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of Middlesex County. However, her lawyer argued the evidence from the purse shouldn’t be allowed in court, as it was obtained illegally since this went against the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. That’s a law known as the “exclusionary rule,” by the way. The Court allowed the evidence to be used anyway, and found her guilty, sentencing her to probation for one year. She was also fined $1,000 and expelled from school.
But T.L.O. appealed to the Superior Court of New Jersey. But it agreed with the lower court, saying the exclusionary rule did not apply to school officials and they could certainly search a student’s personal property.
So T.L.O. appealed again, this time to the New Jersey Supreme Court, who reversed the lower decision and sided with T.L.O. It argued the Fourth Amendment does apply to searches and seizures made by school officials in public schools.
So this time New Jersey appealed, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments on March 28, 1984, and then again on October 2, 1984. The big question was “does the exclusionary rule apply to searches conducted by school officials in public schools?”
Content
Mr.
Beat presents Supreme Court Briefs Piscataway, New Jersey March 7, 1980 A teacher catches, two students smoking in a bathroom of Piscataway High School.
Since smoking in the bathroom perhaps obviously went against school rules.
The teacher took the two girls to the Principal’s office.
Assistant Vice Principal Theodore Choplick interrogated, the two girls.
One of them admitted to smoking.
The other girl, a 14-year old freshman, later known simply by her initials to protect her privacy, T.L.O., denied that she had been smoking.
Choplick thought T.L.O.
was lying, of course.
He forced her to come into his office, so he could search her purse.
Inside the purse.
He found a pack of cigarettes.
Next to the cigarettes, in plain view, were rolling papers, which he thought might be used for marijuana, so he kept searching.
The purse.
He also found a pipe, empty plastic bags, a bunch of $1 bills rolled up together, an index card that apparently listed students who owed T.L.O.
money, and even two letters seeming to show that T.L.O.
was dealing.
Marijuana.
Choplick reported what he found to the police, giving what he found in the purse to them, as evidence.
T.L.O.
later voluntarily confessed to police that she had been selling marijuana at the high school.
Based on the confession and seized evidence.
The state of New Jersey charged T.L.O.
with possession of marijuana in the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of Middlesex County.
However.
Her lawyer argued the evidence from the purse shouldn’t be allowed in court, as it was obtained illegally, since this went against the Fourth Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution.
That’s, a law known as the “exclusionary rule,” by the way.
The Court allowed the evidence to be used anyway, and found her guilty, sentencing her to probation for one year.
She was also fined.
$1,000 and expelled from school.
But T.L.O.
appealed to the Superior Court of New Jersey.
But.
It agreed with the lower court, saying the exclusionary rule did not apply to school officials and they could certainly search a student’s personal property.
So T.L.O.
appealed again, this time to the New Jersey Supreme Court, who reversed the lower decision and sided with T.L.O.
It argued.
The Fourth Amendment does apply to searches and seizures made by school officials in public schools.
So.
This time, New Jersey appealed, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments on March, 28, 1984, and then again on October 2, 1984.
The big question was “does.
The exclusionary rule apply to searches conducted by school officials in public schools?”, The Court said yes.
Why.
Yes, it does.
But.
They sided with New Jersey.
It was 6-3.
Yep.
So The Court, held that public school officials may conduct searches without a warrant.
As long as there is a “reasonable suspicion.” According to legal standards, a reasonable suspicion is less than probable cause, but it is still more than a hunch.
It has to be based on specific facts.
In.
The case of T.L.O., her having cigarettes was relevant to whether or not she was telling the truth, and Mr.
Choplick had a reasonable suspicion to think cigarettes were in her purse.
Since the teacher took her straight to his office.
In addition, after Mr.
Choplick opened the purse.
The other stuff was in plain view.
Plain view is a well understood exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment.
So Mr.
Choplick was not going against the Fourth Amendment, and that evidence could be used in court.
In.
His dissent, Justice William Brennan argued that Mr.
Choplick’s did go too far.
“When.
He opened the purse.
He discovered the pack of cigarettes.
At this point, his search for evidence of the smoking violation was complete.”.
Brennan, said continuing to rummage through T.L.O.
's purse was a violation of her privacy.
Regardless, New Jersey.
V.
T.L.O.
is the case that makes it clear that.
As long as there is a reasonable suspicion.
The principal can search your backpack at school, kid.
So don’t get any ideas.
You hear? I’ll, see you for the next Supreme Court case, jury! What do YOU think? Do.
You agree with the Court in this case? Let me know in the comments below.
Also, which Supreme Court case should I cover next? And I’ll, be in downtown in Atlanta, Georgia on March 19th for a meet up with Step Back History, and the Cynical Historian, and Heimler History.
If.
You can join us.
Please fill out the survey in the description of this video.
And.
Here is my monthly shout out to my Patreon supporters, who donate at least $15 or more a month.
At, the George Washington level, Eric B.
Wolman, Matt Standish, Alicia Solberg, Austin, Rudolph, Elcaspar, Nik Everett, and Sean Conant.
At, the Grover Cleveland level, Andrew Schneider, Cjkavy, John Johnson, Kit Walker, and Zachary F.
Parker.
Thanks to all my Patreon supporters, and thank YOU for watching!.
FAQs
Why the Principal Can Search Your Purse | New Jersey v. T. L. O.? ›
T.L.O.: Qualified Fourth Amendment Rights for Public School Students. This article examines New Jersey v. T.L.O., a 1984 case in which the Supreme Court recognized for the first time that the fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches of students and their possessions by public school officials.
What is the significance of the TLO v New Jersey case? ›T.L.O.: Qualified Fourth Amendment Rights for Public School Students. This article examines New Jersey v. T.L.O., a 1984 case in which the Supreme Court recognized for the first time that the fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches of students and their possessions by public school officials.
What was the subject matter in the NJ v TLO case questioned? ›Many of the Supreme Court's most notable cases involve the constitutional rights of students in public schools. In New Jersey v. T.L.O., decided in 1985, the Supreme Court took up the issue of when school officials can search students' personal belongings.
Why does the Court give school officials more freedom than the police to conduct searches? ›Why did the Court give school officials more freedom than the police to conduct searches? A. Because it's the school official's job to keep the school safe and if they have reason to search they can. What are maps and why are they useful?
Which was a finding by the Supreme Court in New Jersey v. T.L.O. quizlet? ›The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed, holding that the exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment applies to searches and seizures conducted by school officials in public schools.
What is the exclusionary rule? ›The exclusionary rule prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. The decision in Mapp v. Ohio established that the exclusionary rule applies to evidence gained from an unreasonable search or seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
What was the case in which the Supreme Court heard a legal challenge to affirmative action programs? ›Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), was a landmark case of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning affirmative action in student admissions.
What did the Supreme Court case New Jersey vs TLO give schools? ›The Supreme Court's decision in New Jersey v. TLO was that school officials could conduct searches of students if they had reasonable suspicion that a student was violating school rules or engaging in criminal activity.
Which of these statements best describes the court's ruling in New Jersey versus TLO? ›Which of these statements best describes the Court's ruling in New Jersey v. T.L.O.? Students are protected from unreasonable search and seizure.
What is TLO's name? ›T.L.O.'s real name was Tracy Lois Odem. Her name was not released until much later after T.L.O.
What is an example of an unreasonable search and seizure? ›
You are not considered to have a reasonable privacy interest in property left out in plain view. This means, for example, that if you leave a gun or bag of marijuana out on the seat of the vehicle and you are stopped, the police may be able to seize it without a search warrant if it is in plain view.
Why is freedom from unreasonable search and seizure important? ›The Fourth Amendment is important because it protects American citizens from unreasonable search and seizure by the government, which includes police officers. It sets the legal standard that police officers must have probable cause and acquire a warrant before conducting a search.
What is the search and seizure in New Jersey v TLO? ›The Court held that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not limited solely to the actions of law enforcement personnel. It also applies to the conduct of public school officials. Public school teachers act as agents of the state, and not merely agents of the students' parents.
When did the New Jersey vs TLO case happen? › What is a similarity between the Supreme Court decisions in New Jersey v. T.L.O. and Vernonia v Acton quizlet? ›Answer: a school's disciplinary authority outweighs constitutional protections is correct because this is the similarity between Supreme Court decisions in New Jersey v. T. L. O. and Vernonia v.
Which was a finding by the Supreme Court in New Jersey? ›Which was a finding by the Supreme Court in New Jersey v. T.L.O.? The Fourth Amendment does not apply to students. Students are protected from unreasonable searches.
What are the 3 exceptions to the exclusionary rule? ›Three exceptions to the exclusionary rule are "attenuation of the taint," "independent source," and "inevitable discovery."
Why is illegally obtained evidence admissible in court? ›In a criminal case, evidence must be lawfully obtained to be admissible. Generally, illegally obtained evidence cannot be used against you in a court of law. While there are some exceptions, a qualified defense attorney can argue against any evidence that was obtained in violation of your constitutional rights.
What is an example of the exclusionary rule being used? ›Exclusionary Rule Examples
Example 1: The police pull over John and illegally search his car where they find drugs. They arrest him, but at his suppression hearing, the judge excludes the evidence in the case according to the exclusionary rule.
Brown v Board of Ed was considered judicial activism at the time, which ruled that racial segregation of children in public schools was unconstitutional. However, Dred Scott v.
Which case helped women's rights? ›
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113.
Which Supreme Court case ruled that racial quotas could not be used? ›Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978) | PBS. In Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Court ruled unconstitutional a university's use of racial "quotas" in its admissions process, but held that affirmative action programs could be constitutional in some circumstances.
What Supreme Court case allows students to make a symbolic protest in public schools? ›Tinker v. Des Moines is a historic Supreme Court ruling from 1969 that cemented students' rights to free speech in public schools. Mary Beth Tinker was a 13-year-old junior high school student in December 1965 when she and a group of students decided to wear black armbands to school to protest the war in Vietnam.
Why does the court say the requirement of a warrant is unsuited to the school environment? ›The warrant requirement, in particular, is unsuited to the school environment: requiring a teacher to obtain a warrant before searching a child suspected of an infraction of school rules (or of the criminal law) would unduly interfere with the maintenance of the swift and informal disciplinary procedures needed in the ...
What is legal due process? ›due process of law. n. a fundamental principle of fairness in all legal matters, both civil and criminal, especially in the courts. All legal procedures set by statute and court practice, including notice of rights, must be followed for each individual so that no prejudicial or unequal treatment will result.
Why did the court decide the search of the students purse did not violate the Fourth Amendment? ›Why did the court decide to search of the student's purse did not violate the fourth amendment? The search was reasonable.
What is a major purpose of the judicial branch of government? ›Federal courts enjoy the sole power to interpret the law, determine the constitutionality of the law, and apply it to individual cases. The courts, like Congress, can compel the production of evidence and testimony through the use of a subpoena.
What does the Fourth Amendment protect against? ›The Constitution, through the Fourth Amendment, protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.
What was the ruling number in New Jersey v TLO? ›Although the Fourth Amendment applies to searches in public schools, the more lenient standard of reasonable suspicion replaces the ordinary standard of probable cause.
What was the dissenting opinion in New Jersey v TLO? ›In his dissenting opinion, Justice Brennan argued the thorough search of T.L.O.'s purse was unreasonable. “When he opened the purse, he discovered the pack of cigarettes. At this point, his search for evidence of the smoking violation was complete.” Do you agree?
How does the 4th Amendment affect students? ›
The Supreme Court of the United States held that yes, students do have a right to be safe from unreasonable searches and seizures even when they are within the confines of the school building.
Is unreasonable search and seizure covered in the 5th Amendment? ›United States, 269 U.S. 33–34 (1925) ( It is well settled that, when properly invoked, the Fifth Amendment protects every person from incrimination by the use of evidence obtained through search or seizure made in violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment. ); Marron v.
What protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures *? ›The Fourth Amendment protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures.
What are the 4 specific things that are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures under the 4th Amendment? ›The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things ...
What constitutes an unreasonable search? ›An unreasonable search and seizure is a search and seizure executed 1) without a legal search warrant signed by a judge or magistrate describing the place, person, or things to be searched or seized or 2) without probable cause to believe that certain person, specified place or automobile has criminal evidence or 3) ...
Can police walk around your property? ›Your Answer: Yes, the police can enter your property without permission—under certain conditions. By law, the front yard of your home (legally described as the “curtilage”) is usually open season for anybody — including the police — to walk through so they can knock on the door of the home.
Why was search and seizure important? ›FOURTH AMENDMENT GUARANTEES AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES PROVIDE IMPORTANT SAFEGUARDS FOR INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY BUT POSE VEXING PROBLEMS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS. CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN TO THOSE ACTIVITIES WHICH CONSTITUTE A SEARCH AND THOSE PERSONS AND PLACES WHICH ARE PROTECTED.
What did the Supreme Court rule regarding student search and seizure in New Jersey v TLO? ›Decision: In 1985, the Supreme Court, by a 6-3 margin, ruled that New Jersey and the school had met a "reasonableness" standard for conducting such searches at school.
What is the ruling on search and seizure? ›The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures. Generally, evidence found through an unlawful search cannot be used in a criminal proceeding.
What did the United States Supreme Court rule in New Jersey v TLO and Vernonia School District v Acton? ›Acton, legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on June 26, 1995, ruled (6–3) that an Oregon school board's random drug-testing policy for student athletes was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
What did the Supreme Court decide in Vernonia v Acton students were required to submit to all drug tests? ›
Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995), was a U.S. Supreme Court decision which upheld the constitutionality of random drug testing regimen implemented by the local public schools in Vernonia, Oregon. Under that regimen, student-athletes were required to submit to random drug testing before being allowed to participate in sports.
Which was a finding by the Supreme Court in New Jersey v TLO quizlet? ›The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed, holding that the exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment applies to searches and seizures conducted by school officials in public schools.
What did the Supreme Court allow a New Jersey in a 1947 decision? ›Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947), the Supreme Court ruled as constitutional a New Jersey statute allocating taxpayer funds to bus children to religious schools — because it did not breach the “wall of separation” between church and state — and held that the establishment clause of the First Amendment applied to ...
Which Court case had direct correlation to the 14th Amendment? ›The decision of Scott v. Sandford, considered by many legal scholars to be the worst ever rendered by the Supreme Court, was overturned by the 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution, which abolished slavery and declared all persons born in the United States to be citizens of the United States.
What reason did the Court give for allowing school officials to censor the school paper? ›Decision and Reasoning
The Court noted that the paper was sponsored by the school and, as such, the school had a legitimate interest in preventing the publication of articles that it deemed inappropriate and that might appear to have the imprimatur of the school.
Board of Education (1954, 1955) The case that came to be known as Brown v. Board of Education was actually the name given to five separate cases that were heard by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the issue of segregation in public schools.
What did the Supreme Court rule about religion in public schools? ›In Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962), the Supreme Court ruled that school-sponsored prayer in public schools violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment.
What happens if the 14th Amendment was violated? ›A violation of 14th Amendment rights may lead to major leave remedies, including injunctions or damages awards. For example, if a government entity violates an individual's due process rights, the government entity may be required to return the seized property or other similar remedies.
Does the Supreme Court have a right to privacy? ›In Griswold, the Supreme Court found a right to privacy, derived from penumbras of other explicitly stated constitutional protections. The Court used the personal protections expressly stated in the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments to find that there is an implied right to privacy in the Constitution.
Why did the 14th Amendment fail? ›Due to judicial and executive inaction, the amendment was not interpreted as anything more than a reiteration of the Thirteenth Amendment's declaration of emancipation for slaves, and it did not guarantee African Americans any civil rights as citizens of the United States.
Why did Choplick search T.L.O.'s purse? ›
Choplick was justified in searching the purse, the Court said, because of his reasonable suspicion that T.L.O. had violated school rules by smoking in the restroom. When he opened the purse, evidence of marijuana use was in plain view; this justified the further search of the purse.
Why does the Court say the requirement of a warrant is unsuited to the school environment? ›The warrant requirement, in particular, is unsuited to the school environment: requiring a teacher to obtain a warrant before searching a child suspected of an infraction of school rules (or of the criminal law) would unduly interfere with the maintenance of the swift and informal disciplinary procedures needed in the ...