New Jersey v. TLO Unit 4 Lesson 10.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1985.  3/7/80, 2 Freshmen at Piscataway High School is found in the girl’s bathroom smoking cigarettes.  They were brought to the AP’s office  One.
Advertisements

"... The warrant requirement, in particular, is unsuited to the school environment... [T]he legality of a search of a student should depend simply on the.
Historical Background Dollree Mapp was under suspicion for possibly hiding a person suspected in a bombing. Mapp refused to let the police in her home.
Supreme Court Case Presentation By Nicholas Childers.
 Record in Agenda: 1) Notebook check next class– all notes & class activities should have been completed and glued into your notebook. Check the Absent.
SEARCH AND SEIZURE A REASONABLE TEST Created by the Ohio State Bar Foundation.
Marbury vs. Madison (1803) Essential Skill:
New Jersey V.S T.L.O. Argued March 28, 1984 Reargued Oct 2, 1984 Decided Jan 15, 1985.
Search and Seizure in Public Schools
Landmark Cases: Search and Seizure
Simulate the Supreme Court
Fourth Amendment: Searches at School Note: Some photos and text in the PowerPoint are adapted from a lesson plan developed by Lindsey Kakert. The lesson.
Supreme Court Cases. What you need to know to present your case: The background of the case – What happened? – What were both sides of the argument? Constitutional.
Law enforcement officers conduct searches every day in an effort to find evidence that can be seized and used in court to prosecute people who have violated.
Cases on student rights. Tinker vs. Des Moines Who remembers the legal principle involved in Tinker?
New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985) David Kumar. Table of Contents Background Progression Through Courts Constitutional Issues Supreme Court Ruling.
Fourth Amendment What are your rights in school?.
Supreme Court Cases. U. S. v. Nixon Background: Background: Watergate Hotel; burglars break into Democratic Party headquarters. White House staff are.
Objective 29l-Analyze the rights of the accused Kelsey McLaughlin and Kelsey Bois Kelsey McLaughlin and Kelsey Bois.
4 th & 5 th Amendment Rights BR: Are your privacy rights at risk today?
Student Rights: What rights do students have once inside the schoolhouse door? Tinker v. Des Moines and New Jersey v. T.L.O.
Street Law Fourth Amendment Rights
The Rights of Individuals Analyze court cases that demonstrate how the U.S. constitution and the bill of rights protect the rights of individuals.
Case Study Presentation
Analyzing a Court Decision An overview of Student Searches presented by Bart Fennemore.
469 U.S. 325 January 15, 1985 Circumstances of the Case On March 7, 1980 a teacher at Piscataway High School found T.L.O with a friend smoking cigarettes.
NJ vs. T.L.O. Peter Kotsovolos and Matt Spiegel. Parties & Roles  Two fourteen year-old high school freshman were caught smoking in the school bathroom.
The Fourth Amendment What are Your Rights? Search and Seizure:
Landmark Supreme Court Cases: Mr. Blough Academic Civics.
Bellringer What was the theory behind Reaganomics? During the Gilded Age what was the economic policy followed by the government? What was the problem.
New Jersey v. T.L.O By Luke Wills and Caroline Weschler.
Grady L. Hunt Locklear, Jacobs, Hunt & Brooks (910) The information contained in this presentation is intended for general.
THE 4 TH AMENDMENT The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall.
By: Adrienne Hardwig Kelsi Teague Kelina Seyferth Ashlee Schaefer Daltun Hasty.
Lockers : Should the Teachers Have the Keys ? Hannah Devore Honaker 3 rd September 2009.
New Jersey vs. T.L.O. (1985) Lori Wolfe and Ann Peterson.
New Jersey vs TLO By Sarah Shelleh.
Do They Have the Right??? You SHALL Decide……. Case #1 The United States is involved in a controversial war. To show their opposition to the war, two students.
Unit 4 Lesson 7: Gideon v. Wainwright
Unit 4 Lesson 8: Miranda v. Arizona
Tinker v. Des Moines Unit 4 Lesson 9.
A student’s rights to privacy and freedom of speech in a school setting.  Objective:  Students will describe student rights and constitutional issues.
New Jersey vs. T.L.O. (1985) By Shaquille Stanley Victor Baquerizo.
CALL TO ORDER  Have you or someone you’ve known ever been searched by the police, legally or illegally?  What do you know about the rules that police.
The Fourth Amendment COURT CASES. What does the Fourth Amendment say? The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
Bill of Rights Test Cases. Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or.
Eliseo Lugo III.  In Weeks v. United States, 1914, the Court ruled that evidence obtained by police illegally is not admissible in federal court—a practice.
U.S Supreme Court Cases Francesca Reis Isabel Pittman Pierce Robinson Frias Shihady.
New Jersey v TLO Trevor B. & Akilia R.. Facts about the case : In 1980, a teacher at Piscataway in NJ discovered two girl smoking in a restroom This was.
Facts of the Case  Two students were found smoking cigarettes in a school bathroom.  One of the students (TLO) denied smoking, so her bag was searched.
Limiting the Right of Search
What Do You Think? The principal is walking down the hall at the end of lunch, hurrying students to class. As he passes the bathroom, he smells marijuana.
Introduction to the Federal Court System
Mapp v. Ohio (1961) 367 U.S. 643.
Do They Have The Right?.
LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES:
New Jersey v. T.L.O Rachel Sturgis.
Introduction to Federal Court System
4th Amendment Jorge Gonzalez.
U.S. Constitution: States, Amending, Federalism, and Ratification
October 16, 2018 Modern Issues in the U.S. Agenda:
Bill of Rights Test Cases
The Bill of Rights What rights and freedoms does the Bill of Rights protect and why are they important?
Film Clip: Crash Course - Legal System Basics: #18
Search & Seizure The act of taking possession of this property.
Safford United School District #1 v. Redding
Search & Seizure in Schools:
Alexzandria Rosser 469 U.S. 325 (1985)
Constitutional Rights: Protections and Limitations
New Jersey v. T.L.O. 469 US 325 (1985) By Sage Miller.
Presentation transcript:

New Jersey v. TLO Unit 4 Lesson 10

Warm-up What can the school do if they think you have something that isn’t allowed at school? How is it different from what the police can do?

Objective After class today, you should be able to describe the impact of the Supreme Court decision in New Jersey v. TLO.

Background In 1980, a teacher at a high school in New Jersey found two girls smoking in a bathroom. Students were allowed to smoke in some areas of the school, but smoking in the restrooms was against school rules. The teacher took the two girls to the principal's office. There, they met with Assistant Vice Principal Theodore Choplick. One of the girls was T.L.O., a 14-year-old freshman. T.L.O. said she had not been smoking and said that she did not smoke at all.

Background Choplick took T.L.O. into his office. He told her to give him her purse. When he opened the purse, he found a pack of cigarettes. While removing the cigarettes from the purse he found a package of rolling papers. In his opinion, this meant that T.L.O. might be using marijuana. He decided to search T.L.O.'s purse some more. When he did so, he found: some marijuana, a pipe, empty plastic bags, one-dollar bills, a list of students who owed T.L.O. money, and some letters indicating that T.L.O. was selling marijuana.

Background Choplick then called T.L.O.'s mother and the police. Choplick gave the items from the purse to the police. The police asked the mother to take T.L.O. to the police station. At the police station, T.L.O. admitted that she had been selling marijuana at school. The State of New Jersey brought charges against T.L.O. The evidence they used was T.L.O.'s admission and the items from her purse.

Background T.L.O. said that the search violated the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure. She tried to have the evidence from her purse kept out of court. She also argued that her confession should be suppressed, because it happened as a result of the unreasonable search. The juvenile court turned down her Fourth Amendment arguments.

Background The Court said that a school official may search a student if that official has a "reasonable suspicion that a crime has been or is in the process of being committed". A school official may also search a student if he has "reasonable cause to believe that the search is necessary to maintain school discipline or enforce school policies."

Appeals T.L.O. appealed her case in the New Jersey courts. The Supreme Court of New Jersey found that Choplick's search was unreasonable. The state appealed. In 1983, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear the case. In 1985, the Court handed down its decision.

The Supreme Court In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of New Jersey and the school, and against T.L.O.  Justice White wrote the majority opinion.  The majority concluded that school officials do not need a warrant to justify a search as long as there was reasonable suspicion that a student had violated school rules. 

TLO LOST THE CASE

In this case, was the court interpreting the Constitution or a law? Constitution (4th amendment) How did this case impact the rights of students in school? School only needs “reasonable suspicion” to search a student Did this decision increase or decrease the rights of students in school? DECREASE

Multiple Choice Practice 1. According to the Supreme Court’s decision in New Jersey v. T.L.O., a school administrator can legally search the locker of a student who brags about stealing a wallet prevent a student from peacefully expressing an opinion suspend a student without an explanation of the offense prevent a student from performing in a controversial, privately sponsored play

Multiple Choice Practice 2. In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that illegally obtained evidence could not be used in state courts. Which of these constitutional rights is protected by this ruling? the right to counsel the right to free speech the right to protection against self-incrimination the right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure