-
The Supreme Court ruling in Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton that random drug testing of high school student athletes without probable cause was constitutional because participation in extracurricular athletics means these students can expect less privacy was reached for policy reasons and was misguided. The policy goal of decreasing drug use among American youth does not justify robbing students of their privacy.
... The Court first adopted such a test in New Jersey v. T.L.0.(44) In T.L.O., a principal searched a st...IV. SUMMARY OF OPINIONS . A. MAJORITY OPINION . The Supreme Court vacated ...
-
... of the Court for "rendering advisory opinions at the request of the Executive." (241) And Bob Jo...617, 617 (1988) (per curiam); New Jersey v. T.L.O., 468 U.S. 1214 (1984) (mem.). . (140.) S...
-
...Ct. 1227, 1232 (1990) and New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 345, 105 S. Ct. 733, 744 ... reading a few of the Supreme Court's opinions written just prior to the CCA's decision of Octobe...
-
... the bellwether of state initiatives, New Jersey's contribution was more inclusive, and the consequ... of either contrastingly premising opinions on the education clauses or articles of state cons...
-
... Justice Department issue the requisite opinions in order to know where the bright lines were that ... Waldron, supra note 7, at 1692 (citing New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 379 n.21 (1985)). . (147....
-
Introduction. I. Categorical Exclusion Of Parolees From Fourth Amendment Protection: Samson V. California. A. Background Probationer´s Rights Under the Fourth Amendment. B. Samson v. California. 1. The Majority Opinion. 2. The Dissent. C. Critiquing Justice Thomas´ Opinion. 1. The Court Assumes, Without Evidence or Analysis, That Suspicionless Searches Deter Effective Monitoring of Parolees. 2. The "Continuum" Theory of Privacy Remains Undeveloped by the Court. 3. Despite the Court´s Insistence, Samson Allows for Arbitrary and Capricious Searches of Parolees. 4. What Happened to the Special Needs Doctrine?. II. Taking On The Exclusionary Rule: Hudson V. Michigan. A. Existing Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule. B. Hudson v. Michigan-The Frontal Assault on the Exclusionary Rule Beg...
... a number of significant Fourth Amendment opinions, explained, the deterrent effect of damage actions... requirements impracticable (quoting New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 351 (1985) (Blackmun, J.,...
-
...Id. at 440 (quoting New Jersey v. . T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 345 (1985)). . . ..... The State and the dissenting opinions of Chief Judge Jones and Judge Owen argue that the...
-
...New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Ring in Bottoson v. Moor... majority cites dissenting and concurring opinions from this Court stating the beliefs of individual ...
-
... trial are set forth in the prior opinions this court, the Supreme Court, and the Texas Court...(quoting New Jersey v. . T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 345 (1985)...
-
The courts could find warrantless public housing sweeps like those detailed in Pratt v. Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) constitutional, but analysis of both liberal and communitarian perspectives on such searches suggests that other means of promoting public safety should be considered. Based on crime prevention motivations, the CHA engaged in extensive searches of public housing units, including closets and personal belongings. Courts could carve out an exception to the warrant requirement for such searches, but both individual and community rights would be ill-served by allowing the sweeps.
... pursuant to a special need.(88) In New Jersey v. T.L.O.,(89) the Supreme Court first used the "s... also suggested that the disparity in opinions may have been because the housing development wher...