This study examined federal and state court decisions related to student Fourth Amendment rights following the New Jersey v. T.L.O. ruling in 1985. There has been minimal research in judicial treatment of students’ Fourth Amendment rights across regions of the country and less to what extent regional rulings implicitly or explicitly transmit cues about acceptable administrative behavior. From data gathered from case law and the National Center for Education Statistics, the analysis examined the link between the characteristics of the school where the search occurred, aspects related to the search of the student, and the outcome of the case by national region. Catagorical analyses revealed a considerable regional effect associated with highly discretionary elements of Fourth Amendment law. Findings of note suggest a greater likelihood of students losing in court within urban contexts and considerable discrepancies in rulings between national regions with respect to search intrusiveness and the severity of the offense. Implications for legal decision-making and implementation are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgrestiA. (1996). An introduction to categorical data analysis.New York: Wiley.
2.
AgrestiA. (2002). Categorical data analysis.New York: Wiley.
3.
AlexanderK., & AlexanderM. D. (2009). American public school law (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth-Cengage.
4.
AshenfelterO., EisenbergT., & SchwabS. J. (1995). Politics and the judiciary: The influence of judicial background on case outcomes. Journal of Legal Studies, 24, 257–281.
5.
BaumL. (1994). What judges want: Judges goals and judicial behavior. Political Research Quarterly, 47(3), 749–768.
6.
BegerR. R. (2002). Expansion of police power in public schools and the vanishing rights of students. Social Justice, 29(1/2), 119–130.
7.
Board of Education v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822 (2002).
8.
BrownF. (2004). The first serious implementation of Brown: The 1964 Civil Rights Act and beyond. Journal of Negro Education, 73(3), 182–190.
9.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
10.
Brown v. Board of Education II, 349 U.S. 294 (1955).
11.
CarpR. A., & RowlandC. K. (1983). Policymaking and politics in the federal district courts.Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.
12.
ChangD. (1987). Conflict, coherence, and constitutional intent. Iowa Law Review, 72(4), 753–890.
13.
ClarkG. L. (1985). Judges and the cities: Interpreting local autonomy.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14.
CookB. (1977). Public opinion and federal judicial policy. American Journal of Political Science, 21, 567–600.
15.
DolbeareK. (1973). The Supreme Court and the states: From abstract doctrine to local behavioral conformity. In BeckerT. L., & FeeleyM. M. (Eds.), The impact of Supreme Court decisions (2nd ed., pp. 202–210). New York: Oxford University Press.
16.
EitleT. M., & EitleD. J. (2004). Inequality, segregation, and the overrepresentation of African Americans in school suspensions. Sociological Perspectives, 47(3), 269–287.
17.
ElazarD. (1966). American federalism: A view from the states.New York: Crowell.
18.
ElmoreR. F., & McLaughlinM. W. (1988). Steady work: Policy, practice and the reform of American education.Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
19.
FishmanJ. J., & StraussL. (1990). Endless journey: Integration and the provision of equal educational opportunity in Denver's public schools: A study of Keyes v. School District No. 1. In FlickerB. (Ed.), Justice and school systems: The role of the courts in education litigation (pp. 185–232). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
20.
GardnerM. (2011). Strip searching students: The Supreme Court's latest failure to articulate a “sufficiently clear” statement of Fourth Amendment law. Mississippi Law Journal, 80, 955–1034.
21.
GluckmanI. B. (1984). Schools searches and the 4th Amendment. West's Education Law Reporter, 13(1), 199–209.
22.
GoldmanS., & JahnigeT. P. (1985). The federal courts as a political system (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: Harper & Row.
23.
GordonW. M. (1989). School desegregation: A look at the 70s and 80s. Journal of Law and Education, 18(2), 189–214.
24.
Green v. County Board of New Kent County, 391 U.S. 430 (1968).
25.
JohnsonC. A., & CanonB. C. (1984). Judicial process: Implementation and impact.Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
26.
KolomsA. B. (2010). Stripping down the reasonableness standard: The problems with using in loco parentis to define students’ Fourth Amendment rights. Hofstra Law Review, 39, 169–199.
27.
LevineJ. P., & BeckerT. L. (1973). Toward and beyond a theory of Supreme Court impact. In BeckerT. L., & FeeleyM. M. (Eds.), The impact of Supreme Court decisions (2nd ed., pp. 230–244). New York: Oxford University Press.
28.
McKinneyJ. R. (1994). The Fourth Amendment and the public schools: Reasonable suspicion in the 1990s. West's Educational Law Reporter, 91, 455–463.
29.
MitauG. T. (1967). Decade of decision: The Supreme Court and the constitutional revolution, 1954-1964.New York: Scribner's.
National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab, 489 U.S. 656 (1989).
32.
New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985).
33.
O'HaraJ. U. (1984). Search and seizure analysis in school settings. West's Education Law Reporter, 13(1), 1–7.
34.
OwenS. S. (2005). The relationship between social capital and corporal punishment in schools: A theoretical inquiry. Youth and Society, 37(1), 85–112.
35.
PeltasonJ. W. (1961). Fifty-eight lonely men.New York: Harcourt, Brace.
36.
PutnamR. D. (2000). Bowling alone.New York: Simon & Schuster.
37.
Raffaele-MendezL. M., KnoffH. M., & FerronJ. M. (2002). School demographic variables and out-of-school suspension rates: A quantitative and qualitative analysis of large ethnically diverse school district. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 259–276.
38.
ReutterE. E. (1982). The Supreme Court's impact on public education.Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa and National Organization on Legal Problems in Education.
39.
Safford v. Redding, 557 U.S. 364 (2009).
40.
SalomoneR. C. (1986). Equal education under the law.New York: St. Martin's Press.
41.
SanchezJ. M. (1992). Expelling the Fourth Amendment from American schools: Students’ rights six years after T.L.O.Journal of Law & Education, 21(3), 381–413.
42.
SkibaR. J., MichaelR. S., NardoA. C., & PetersonR. (2002). The color of discipline: Sources of racial and gender disproportionality in school punishment. Urban Review, 34, 317–342.
43.
Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives’ Association, 489 U.S. 602, 613-618 (1989).
44.
SongerD. R. (1988). Alternative approaches to the study of judicial impact—Miranda in 5 state courts. American Politics Quarterly, 16(4), 425–444.
45.
StefkovichJ. A., & GubaG. J. (1998). School violence, school reform, and the Fourth Amendment in public schools. International Journal of Educational Reform, 7(3), 217–225.
46.
StefkovichJ. A., & MillerJ. A. (1999, winter). Law enforcement officers in public schools: Student citizens in safe havens?Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal, pp. 24–69.
47.
StefkovichJ. A., & O'BrienG. M. (1997). Drug testing of students in public schools: Implications of Vernonia School District v. Acton for other types of school-related drug searches. West's Educational Law Reporter, 113, 521–538.
48.
StefkovichJ. A., & TorresM. S. (2003). The demographics of justice: Student searches, student rights, and administrator practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(2), 259–282.
49.
United States v. Johnson, 481 U.S. 681 (1987).
50.
United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976).
51.
Vernonia School District v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995).
52.
WasbyS. L. (1973). Toward impact theory: An inventory of hypotheses. In BeckerT. L., & FeeleyM. M. (Eds.), The impact of Supreme Court decisions (2nd ed., pp. 214–217). New York: Oxford University Press.
53.
WelnerK. G. (2001). Legal rights, local wrongs.Albany: State University of New York Press.
54.
WennerL. M., & DutterL. E. (1988). Contextual influences on court outcomes. Western Political Quarterly, 41, 113–134.
