Middle-School Strip Search Ruled Unconstitutional

yuna49 writes "The US Supreme Court today ruled 8-1 that the strip search of a 13-year-old girl by officials in an Arizona middle school was unconstitutional. However, by a vote of 7-2, the Court also ruled that the individual school officials could not be held personally liable. A suit for damages against the school district itself is still going forward. We discussed this case at length back in March when the Court decided to hear the case on appeal."

Comments

For once, read TFA.

[powerlord]

Okay, I'll admit that, like most Slashdotters, I skip the occasional article and jump straight into the comments, but people should really take the time to read this one!

For instance:

Had Savana been suspected of having illegal drugs that could have posed a far greater danger to herself and other students, the strip search, too, might have been justified, the majority said, in an opinion by Justice David H. Souter.

and

Justice Clarence Thomas was the only member of the court to conclude that the strip search of Savana Redding did not violate the Fourth Amendment. He asserted that the majority's finding second-guesses the measures that educators take to maintain discipline "and ensure the health and safety of the students in their charge."

The discussion about wether the School Administrator should be held responsible is similarly contentious.

Its nice to know that they chose well on upholding her rights, but its sad how close a thing it seems from the article.

Qualified Immunity

[Bryan Gividen]

The reason the officials were not held responsible is because of an idea called qualified immunity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity) which essentially states that public officials cannot be held personally responsible for actions they undertake as part of their public duty and which, if illegal or unconstitutional, must clearly be illegal or unconstitutional.

It is interesting to note that the two Justices that dissented regarding whether or not the school officials were covered by qualified immunity were Justice John Paul Stevens and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and that Justice Souter was a part of the majority. If Sotomayor is placed on the bench, it is feasible she would rule much closer to Justice Ginsburg and Stevens then to Souter on these types of matters.

Re:And the "!" in the 8 to 1 is...

[hansamurai]

Thomas has had a lot of history with the 4th amendment, usually siding with the enforcement side, so maybe his decision isn't too surprising.

See: Samson v. California, or Board of Education v. Earls. However, in Kyllo v. United States he agreed with the defendant that thermal imaging without a warrant violates the 4th.

Re:This is America

[gnick]

Yeah, I want you around my kids.

You're responding to Anonymous Coward.

Rule #1 of parenting is never leave your kids alone with someone until after they agree to tell you their name.