Sup. Ct: Strip Search of an Eighth Grader Violates 4th Amendment

We've discussed the case many times here. This is the one where a 13 year-old student was subjected to a strip search in the nurse's office after another student who was caught with prescription-strength ibuprofen implicated her. The search of her bag turned up nothing, but the school has a "zero tolerance policy" when it comes to drugs of any kind, so the administrators lost their minds and made her strip. And shake.

The Supreme Court decided two questions: does this strip search violate the Constitution? Should the officials involved be protected from civil liability because the law was previously unclear?

The Court answered both questions in the affirmative.

Although the strip search violated Savana’s Fourth Amendment rights, petitioners Wilson, Romero, and Schwallier are protected from liability by qualified immunity because “clearly established law [did] not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment. The intrusiveness of the strip search here cannot, under T. L. O., be seen as justifiably related to the circumstances, but lower court cases viewing school strip searches differently are numerous enough, with well-reasoned majority and dissenting opinions, to counsel doubt about the clarity with which the right was previously stated.

The issue of the school district's liability was remanded for the lower courts to consider first.

The opinion is here (PDF). Justice Souter wrote the majority opinion, joined by the Chief Justice, and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Breyer, and Alito. Ginsburg and Stevens concurred in part and dissented on the question of qualified immunity. Justice Thomas concurred with the qualified immunity decision, but dissented on whether a Fourth Amendment violation occurred.

posted by Gabriel Malor at 10:08 AM

| Access Comments