This is a Complaint pleading for use in litigation of the title matter. Adapt this form to comply with your facts and circumstances, and with your specific state law. Not recommended for use by non-attorneys.
4th Amendment In Schools Cases In Mecklenburg
Category:
State:
Multi-State
County:
Mecklenburg
Control #:
US-000280
Format:
Word;
Rich Text
Instant download
Description
Free preview
Form popularity
FAQ
Children are generally afforded the basic rights embodied by the Constitution. The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment is said to apply to children, but excludes those not yet born. There are both state and federal sources of children's-rights law.
Although it is virtually undisputed that children have some Fourth Amendment rights independent of their parents, it is equally clear that youth generally receive less constitutional protection than adults.
In New Jersey v. T.L.O., the Supreme Court set the test to determine if a school official's search of a student is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. It creates a lower standard than the one required for law enforcement. First, the search must be justified at its inception.
Generally, a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy for property and personal effects they hold open to the public. The Fourth Amendment does not protect things that are visible or in "plain view" for a person of ordinary and unenhanced vision.
The Fourth Amendment applies to searches conducted by public school officials because “school officials act as representatives of the State, not merely as surrogates for the parents.” 350 However, “the school setting requires some easing of the restrictions to which searches by public authorities are ordinarily subject ...
Although it is virtually undisputed that children have some Fourth Amendment rights independent of their parents, it is equally clear that youth generally receive less constitutional protection than adults.
The question posed in the Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg case revolved around whether busing students to distant schools was an appropriate method for achieving desegregation. This case was initiated in response to the ongoing issues of racial imbalance in schools and the actions of Southern states to integrate them.
Students are required by law to attend school, and by statute, principals, teachers, and other school personnel may exercise the same degree of physical control over a pupil that a parent could, in order to maintain order, safety, and a learning environment.
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education? The issue of forced integration was debated. While school districts no longer had overtly segregationist policies, many remained segregated, and Swann argued that they should be forced to integrate.
In 1965, Judge J. Braxton Craven decided Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education in favor of Charlotte-Mecklenburg, because there was no requirement in the Constitution to act purposely to increase racial mixing.