https://padlet.com/asolis57019/vra2n3o3k6vc en-us 2016-10-27 15:29:08 UTC 2017-05-17 01:31:36 UTC hello@padlet.com cmccaffrey71140 https://padlet.com/asolis57019/vra2n3o3k6vc/wish/133662152 Colin McCaffrey

The parties in the case were Weeks vs United states. Some key events that brought this case to court were that the defendant was arrested by a police officer without warrant at the Union Station in Kansas City, Missouri. Other police officers had gone to the house of the defendant without a search warrant. The question that the court had to decide was weather or not to return the defendants personal belongings that the officers tried to use on court and did the search and seizure of Weeks' home violate the Fourth Amendment? The court decided the case by, the seizure of weeks' belongings violated his 4th amendment rights and the items seized were excluded from prosecuting him.  The court reached that decision because the officers searched the house of weeks without a search warrant which violated weeks' 4th amendment right. Because weeks' 4th amendment rights being violated, all officers and officials must have consent from the defendant or a search warrant to enter the designated area. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/232/383/case.html]]> 2016-10-27 15:32:54 UTC https://padlet.com/asolis57019/vra2n3o3k6vc/wish/133662152 vpornthepsiripong68366 https://padlet.com/asolis57019/vra2n3o3k6vc/wish/133663676 Varintorn P.

The parties in this case were Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton.
The key events that occured to bring this case together is Vernonia School district were random drug testing students in public schools and that it was going against the 4th amendment right. The legal issue is that they are complaining that it goes against the 4th amendment because they are drug testing with out a reasonable doubt. The supreme court was asked to decide whether this should  be allowed or not.
The supreme court held (6-3) that the search was reasonable under the 4th amendment. the court reached that decision because even though the 4th protects you and your privacy, if you choose to join a sport or go to that school, you are waiving your right. The precedence created from this case was that athletes have an even less privacy because they use the school's locker, there showers etc. Students have less privacy as well because of the same reason.

]]> 2016-10-27 15:36:20 UTC https://padlet.com/asolis57019/vra2n3o3k6vc/wish/133663676 ekim72225 https://padlet.com/asolis57019/vra2n3o3k6vc/wish/133664280 Eunice Kim http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2016/01/new-jersey-v-t-l-o-the-fourth-amendment-in-public-schools/ 
Parties of the case: T.L.O vs U.S. Supreme Court.
key event that brought this case to court is that two girls, in a high school, were smoking. one was 14 and one one a T.L.O. the 14 year old admitted to smoking but the T.L.O repeatedly denied even though there was clear evidence of drugs and cigarettes in the T.L.O's purse. the assistant vice principal brought the contents to the police, who used that evidence to bring delinquency charges against T.L.O. However,the legal issue was that T.L.O's side argued that this was an illegal search because of the fourth
amendment. The Supreme Court claimed that the school’s search of T.L.O.’s purse was constitutional.Therefore, public school students retain their Fourth Amendment rights.



]]> 2016-10-27 15:37:48 UTC https://padlet.com/asolis57019/vra2n3o3k6vc/wish/133664280 asolis57019 https://padlet.com/asolis57019/vra2n3o3k6vc/wish/133668326 Arianna Solis
Parties involved was the school district and April Redding. Aprils daughter Savana was told by the principal if he could look for some over the counter pills in her backpack; she said yes but he found nothing so he sent her to the nurses office so she can remove her clothes so they can look for it under her clothes. When they removed her clothes they found nothing so they told her to take off her bra and underwear. Her mother then filed a law suit against the school.  It goes against the 4th amendment. The court finds the search constitutional. Savana and April then decide to move to the appeal court. 9th circuit court finds it unconstitutional, so then it moves into the supreme court, because  the school appeals. Where it is found it is violated, but there is an immunity, and is not found guilty. The precedence that is taken from it is that kids shouldn't have to through this, but it is violating students privacy and parents as well shouldn't have to let there kids go through it. the school district should have been found guilty.
 https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5413509098769380901&q=safford+v+redding&hl=en&as_sdt=400006&as_vis=1

]]> 2016-10-27 15:46:54 UTC https://padlet.com/asolis57019/vra2n3o3k6vc/wish/133668326