The Fourth Amendment

1
The Fourth Amendment
4th Amendment
Modern Day Issues
Rights and Responsibilities
Case Study
2
The Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon
probable cause, supported by oath of or
affirmation, and particularly describing the
place to be searched, and the persons or things
to be seized. -Fourth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution
3
Fourth Amendment Explained
In plain language - The Amendment says that
citizens expect the government to leave them
alone, to be free from unwarranted snooping or
spying, and to be secure in their homes. People
have an expectation of privacy and this is
protected by the U.S. Constitution. The Amendment
sets out the right to be free from unreasonable
searches and seizures and establishes the
conditions under which search warrants may be
issued. This right like others in the Bill of
Rights limits the power of the government. But
the Fourth Amendment does not give citizens an
absolute right to privacy and does not prohibit
all searchersonly those that are unreasonable.
Thereby balancing the governments need to gather
information of criminal activity and the
individuals right to privacy. (Source Street
LawA Course in Practical Law, 5th ed. National
Institute for Citizen Education in the Law)
4
Modern Day Issues
Kyllo v. United States, No. 99-8508 (argued Feb.
20)
Should police obtain a search warrant before
using these thermal imaging devices to scan a
home to gather evidence of drug crimes? This
question raises the broader question of whether
the 4th Amendment's guarantee of personal
security in your home must yield to scientific
advances that make traditional barriers of
privacy obsolete.
For more information go to
http//www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/school/4th
_kyllo.html
5
Modern Day Issues contd
Indianapolis v. Edmond Are drug roadblocks by
the police unreasonable searches and
seizures? To find out go to www.abanet.org/pub
liced/preview/school/4th_edmond.html
6
Modern Day Issues Contd
Illinois v. Wardlow Can police detain an
individual solely because the police observed
that upon spotting them the individual ran
away? To find out go to http//www.abanet.or
g/publiced/preview/school/4th_illinois.html
7
Modern Day Issues Contd
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF INDEPENDENT SCHOOL
DISTRICT NO. 92 OF POTTAWATOMIE ?COUNTY et?al. v.
EARLS et?al. Is it constitutional for public
school officials and school boards to have a
school policy to drug test students? To find
out go to http//caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/g
etcase.pl?courtUSnavbycasevol000invol01-332

8
Case Study
The Purse Search Ms. Chen, a high school
teacher, found two students holding lit
cigarettes in the womens restroom. Since
smoking violated school rules, Chen took the
young women to the principals office. When the
principal asked the young women whether they had
been smoking, one student T.L.O., denied it and
claimed she did not smoke. The principal then
asked for her purse, which she handed to him.
When he opened it, he saw cigarettes and a pack
of rolling papers. T.L.O. denied that these
belonged to her. However, on the basis of
experience, the principal knew rolling papers
often indicated marijuana. When he looked
further into the purse, the principal found
marijuana drug paraphernalia, 40.00 in 1. 00
bills, and written documentation of T.L.O.s
sales of marijuana to other students. The
principle called T.L.O.s mother and the
police. (Source Street LawA Course in
Practical Law, 5th ed. National Institute for
Citizen Education in the Law)
9
Questions

• 1. What are the facts of the case?
• 2. Given the facts of the case, did principals
  search of T.L.O.s seem to be reasonable?
• 3. Do you believe that the principal had the
  right to open T.LO.s purse?
• 4. Do you think that school officials should
  have to follow the same legal standards as the
  police when searching students personal property
  for contraband?
• 5. Do you think the principals actions are
  allowable according to the Fourth Amendment?
• 6. Do you think the court should require the
  school officials to have probable cause and
  search warrants before conducting a search a
  students possessions?
• T.L.O. is a euphemism for the actual
  name of the defendant (who was a minor) in
• the case

10
Court Decision
New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985) The
U.S. Supreme Courts Decision In 1985 The U.S
Supreme Court ruled that school officials must
have reasonable suspicion before searching
students, but that neither probable case nor a
search warrant is required. The courts said while
students do not shed their constitutional rights
when they enter the schoolhouse, Forth Amendment
rights are different in public schools than
elsewhere. The court said the proper standard for
school officials is reasonableness. Reasonable
involves a two part test 1 was the action taken
by the school official justified at the inception
(beginning) of the incident and 2. if a search
is conducted is it reasonably related in scope to
the circumstances which justified the
interference in the first place.
11
Rights
Your rights according to court interpretations of
the Fourth Amendment include The right to
privacy, which is to say, you are to be free from
unreasonable searches and seizures by government
officials. - To be assured if a warrant to
search and/or seize your person, papers, or
effects, it has been issued as a result of a
decision that was made by a neutral and impartial
magistrate or judge. - As a student in a public
school the scope of your Fourth Amendment Rights
may be modified to promote the safety and health
of the student body of the school.
12
Responsibilities
Your responsibilities under the Fourth Amendment
include - As a citizen, you should have a basic
understanding of how the Fourth Amendment
protects citizens privacy from unwarranted
governmental intrusion into a persons, papers and
effects. - Identify and evaluate contemporary
issues that involve the right to privacy and
communicate your stance on these issues with
legislators and other organizations concerned
with the constitutionally of laws.