The majority of search and seizure cases in schools involve the confiscation of either illegal drugs or weapons. Students have asserted that warrantless searches conducted by school officials impair their rights under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Through an extensive line of decisions, the Supreme Court has affirmed that the basic purpose of the Fourth Amendment is to “safeguard the privacy and security of individuals against arbitrary invasions by governmental officials.” This amendment protects individuals against unreasonable searches …show more content…
In 1985, the Supreme Court ruled in New Jersey v. T.L.O. that public school officials are state agents, and all governmental actions—not merely those of police officers—come within the constraints of the Fourth Amendment.
Even though the Fourth Amendment is applicable, the Court in T.L.O. concluded that educators’ substantial interest in maintaining discipline required “easing” the warrant and probable cause requirements imposed on police officers. The Court reasoned that requiring educators to obtain a warrant before searching students suspected of violating school rules or criminal laws would interfere with the administration of prompt and informal disciplinary procedures needed to maintain order. In modifying the level of suspicion required to conduct a search, the Court found the public interest was best served in the school setting with a standard less than probable cause. Accordingly, the Court held that the legality of a search should depend “simply on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search.” The standard for school officials remains reasonable suspicion; however, the increase of security guards, police officers, and school resource officers (SROs) in school settings has drawn into question who exactly is afforded this relaxed