https://padlet.com/ccamacho73111/4thAmendmentCaseStudies political things en-us 2016-10-27 15:23:30 UTC 2025-09-25 16:24:28 UTC hello@padlet.com https://padlet-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/icons/Apple.png tusmani13993 https://padlet.com/ccamacho73111/4thAmendmentCaseStudies/wish/133664654 1) Who were the parties in the case?
      A girl named T.L.O and the New Jersey High School

2) What events occurred that brought this case to court?
      Two girls were caught smoking in the bathrooms and one girl denied it. The one who denied it (named T.L.O) had her purse searched  and it was found that she had been selling  marijuana at the school.

3) What was the legal issue? What question was the court asked to decide?
      T.L.O argued that her 4th Amendment right had been violated and the court was asked to decide if the search was acceptable or not.

4) How did the court decide?
      In 1985, the supreme court ruled by a 6-3 margin that the search was "reasonable"

5) Why did the court reach that decision?
       School administrators don't need a search warrant or probable cause to conduct a search because students have reduced expectation of privacy at school.

6) What precedence was established?
        School administrators don't need to have a search warrant in order to conduct searches within the school.



Link:
http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/supreme-court-landmarks/new-jersey-v-tlo-podcast]]> 2016-10-27 15:38:40 UTC https://padlet.com/ccamacho73111/4thAmendmentCaseStudies/wish/133664654 ccamacho73111 https://padlet.com/ccamacho73111/4thAmendmentCaseStudies/wish/133664663 Link: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-590.ZO.html

1) The parties involved in this case were Wayne Acton and the Vernonia School District in Oregon.

2)  The big events that lead up to this case is that back in the 80s, drug use was rising and in High Schools, Drug Use by students was reaching an all-time high (no pun intended). This then required the school districts to do something about it. The Vernonia School District decided that it would be a good idea to randomly test athletes  for Drug use to crack down on the drugs (No pun intended again). In order for a student to be an athlete at this district's high school, they must sign a document that allows them to test them. One student and their parents, by the name of James Acton, decided not to sign this document, but still wished to play football. His parents then pressed charges on the school because this was breaking their 4th Amendment Rights.

3) As stated above, the legal issue here is that the school district was breaking the student's fourth and fourteenth amendment rights. The court was to decide if the school district truly did break these rights.

4) The court decided in favor of the Vernonia school district because their policy is reasonable and constitutional.

5) The court acknowledged that there is indeed a problem with drug use and the rebellion in schools due to drug usage.

6) The precedent established is as follows, "The Fourth Amendment allows random drug testing of high school students involved in athletic programs."]]> 2016-10-27 15:38:42 UTC https://padlet.com/ccamacho73111/4thAmendmentCaseStudies/wish/133664663 amiller79867 https://padlet.com/ccamacho73111/4thAmendmentCaseStudies/wish/133666079 1)Who were the parties in the case? 
 Two officers were charged for not having a warrant.  
2)  What events occurred that brought this case to court? 
The two officers searched a mans house.The man has been selling fake lottery tickets. They did not have a warrant.  
3) What was the legal issue? What question was the court asked to decide?  
They said that "a mans house is his castle" also that they a invading his privacy. 
4)How did the court decide? 
The two officers were found guilty considering it broke the 4th Amendment. 
5)Why did the court reach that decision? 
They were focused on how the two officers broke the 4th Amendment. It was an invasion of privacy. The two officers did not have consent from Weeks and had no warrant. 
6) What precedence was established? 
The officers need a warrant or consent before searching Weeks house

]]> 2016-10-27 15:41:56 UTC https://padlet.com/ccamacho73111/4thAmendmentCaseStudies/wish/133666079 fkuzyk12180 https://padlet.com/ccamacho73111/4thAmendmentCaseStudies/wish/133668234 1) who were the parties in the case

 the parties in the case were the       Stanford Unified School District and Miss April Redding.

2) what events occurred that brought this case to court?

An 8th grader Savanna Redding was strip searched for possibly having ibuprofen a tip from another student at Stanford Middle School.

3) What was the legal issue

Stanford Middle School violated Savanna's 4th Amendment rights of unreasonable search ans seizures.

4) How did the court decide?

the court decided on an 8-1 verdict in favor of the Redding's saying that Savanna's 4th Amendment rights were in fact violated

5)why did the court reach that decision?

the court made that decision because what 4th amendment rights Savanna Redding had at school were very much so violated and therefore the court had a ruling in favor of the Reddings.

6) What Precedence was established?

The court ruled that a nude search of a 13-year old girl is an invasion of constitutional rights


Link:
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2008/08-479]]> 2016-10-27 15:46:42 UTC https://padlet.com/ccamacho73111/4thAmendmentCaseStudies/wish/133668234