Question:Did the search violate the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments?
Decision: The decision of this case was a 5 to 3 vote for the State of New Jersey..
Majority:The decision was a majority decision because they agreed that students don't have privacy for the item they taking into school grounds. The reason for this decision is because the student made the decision to bring inapropriate items into school grounds. A teacher obtaining a warrant before ssearching a suspicious child is an infraction to school rules and would dely the need to improve schools.
Concurring: Justice Blackmun has agreed with the judgment. He believes that the court has left of a crucial step in whether a school search should be based upon a probable cause or not. Eduction is the most important concern of the government, and government have the highest rights to protect students from things that would distract them from learning. The response to the threat of the learning environment was the correct decision because students education should be the number one importance to a school district.
Dissenting: The decision of searching without a warrant was considered against the fourth amendment because there wasn't any “probable cause”. Justice Brennan find that the principal had no right to keep on searching through T.L.O's purse because he found the pack of cigerrettes right when he opend the purse. At the poin t the search should've ended due to the fact that he only needed prove that she was smoking in the bathroom.
How was the Constitution interpreted?
Fourth Amendment: The constitution was not interpreted. The court abandoned the cause of the search of “probable cause” to accuse the student of violating the law. They decided to use a less strict standard of evidence to come to a final decision that the search was not violating the constitution. The court believed that the finding of rolling paper made the principal believe that T.L.O was carrying drugs in her purse. This gave the right for the principal to search the purse thoroughly.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeir:
Did the principal's deletion of the articles violate the students' rights under the First Amendment?
Decision: 5 votes for Hazelwood and 3 votes against the district.
Majority: The Justices have recognized that the First Amendment right of the student in school settings is not compatible with the rights of adults. They believe that a school should not tolerate such foul language because it doesn't coexist with the eductional believes. They havecome to a conclusion that Principal Reynolds acted correctly by deleting the newspaper that Spectrum wrote about pregancy.
Dissenting: When students decided to take Journalism 2, they wanted civil duties too. Spectrum and others want to express their views while gaining an understanding of their right and duties under the First Amendment in the U.S. Constitution.These Justice believe that the speech did not distrub or potentially harm the learning environment in any way.
How was the constitution interpreted?
First Amendment: Speech, Press, and Assembly
The amendment was not violated because the court did not see that the First Amendment require achools to promote unusual types of student speech. The Court believed that school have the right to disregard any student speech as long as its against the shared values of a civilzed social group. Educators did not violate the First Amendments as long their decsions were reasonable and related or an actual concern.
Bethel School v. Fraser
Does the First Amendment prevent a school district from disciplining a high school student for giving a lewd speech at a high school assembly?
Decision: The scored was 7 votes for Bethel School District No. 403 and 2 votes against
Majority: They believed that Fraser had no right to speak with such foul language in front of his peers just to promote his friend for elective office.