Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

School Admins Demand Access to Students' Cellphones

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the why-was-i-calling-paraguay dept.

Reverberant writes "School administrators in Framingham MA have implemented a policy allowing them to not only confiscate cell phones, but also to search through students' cell phone data as part of their anti drug/violence efforts. Students claim that the policy is an invasion of their privacy."

2 of 836 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Property rights by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Informative

    ACLU of Northern California
    http://www.aclunc.org/students/guide/searches.html

    "Can the principal or a teacher search me?

    Yes, but only under certain specific circumstances, because you don't give up your right to privacy when you go to school. Under the law, if a school official wants to search you, there are two requirements. First, before he or she searches you, there must be a "reasonable suspicion," based on facts, that the search will produce evidence that you are violating the law or a school rule. For example, the principal would have to have specific information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a student is carrying a weapon, drugs or cigarettes. Second, the way he or she searches you should be "reasonable" based on your age and what is being searched for.
    These restrictions apply to searches of a student's person (i.e., pat down of clothes, emptying pockets) and any personal belongings, including backpacks, lunch bags, or cars (if they are on school grounds)."

    Reasonable suspicion = all your base are belong to school

    "Remember: if the principal asks if you agree to a search and you say yes, you can turn an illegal search into a legal search."

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  2. Earls vs. Board of Education of Tecumseh PSD, 2002 by jdbartlett · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can read more about reasonable suspicion here. Disturbingly:

    The Supreme Court held in Earls vs. Board of Education of Tecumseh Public School District (2002) that random drug testing was `reasonable' and did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Court also held schools served as `guardian and tutor', could exercise `greater control than those for adults' and had `important interests' in the health and safety of students. The Court finally held that schools did not need to show an `individualized suspicion' nor a `demonstrated problem of drug abuse' and there was no `threshold level' of violation that needed to be satisfied.

    Since it's been established that cell phones are fair game, could this ruling be used in defence of random cell phone checks?

    I'd ask what next, but I fear I already know.