There is a question whether legal rights should hinder policy makers to ensure school safety.
Some students dispute the right of school officials to conduct searches and drug tests, stating that it violates their constitutional right to privacy. The right to privacy, however, should not, and could not be used to conceal wrongdoings. School officials has the right to protect its students from harmful elements, whether this harm is coming from the environment or from the students themselves.The article of Dorianne Beyer, entitled School Safety and Legal Rights of Students, discusses the law turning in favor of the school to ensure safety but also considers the students' legal rights. One of the topics discussed is the search and seizure policy in schools. It has been disputed that this policy is against the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution which “requires a warrant and probable cause before a search is considered reasonable” (Beyer 1997).
Searching students' belongings were questioned before, saying that it is unconstitutional.However, in 1985, the court decided in New Jersey v. T. L.
O. that the requirement of reasonableness was met if school authorities acted without warrant if there was “reasonable grounds for sduspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school” (Beyer 1997). Futhermore, the court held that “a search will be permissible in its scope when the measures adopted are reasonable related to the objectives of the search and are not excessively intrusive in the light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction” (Beyer 1997).The law has also provided factors to consider when conducting a search to ensure it is reasonable, including the students' “age, history, and school record; the seriousness and pervasiveness as a school problem of the suspected infraction or crime; the urgency that required the search without delay; the school official's prior experience with the student; and the evidentiary value and reliability of the information used to justify the search” (Beyer 1997).
T. L. O. the name given to the student involved in this case to protect her identity, was accused of violating her school's policy against smoking within school property. Her purse was searched by the principal and was found guilty of possessing “not only a pack of cigarettes but also rolling papers associated with marijuana use, marijuana, a pipe, plastic bags, a list of students who owed T. L.
O. money, and two letters that involved her in dealing marijuana” (Beyer). Another safety measure that some schools conduct is drug testing.The topic of drug testing among students who would like to join the school athletics was discussed in Acton v. Vernonia wherein the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that students “do not have to surrender their right to privacy in order to secure their right to participate in athletics” (Beyer 1997). However, the US Supreme Court reversed the decision stating that “the test was being used only to determine illicit drug use rather than to identify any medical situation” (Beyer 1997).
Beyer has stated many examples of cases where the school's policy works in favor of school safety. These policies may be conceived as violating privacy rights but is working for the general population of the school. School safety should take precedence over privacy rights to avoid school violence and to ensure that students are molded into proper citizens. Furthermore, the US supreme Court held in Vernonia that “legitimate governmental interests outweighed any intrusion on students' privacy rights” (Beyer 1997).
