LATEST
NEWS
To
All MUT Members
Please
note you can avail yourself of a special rate throughout the
month of July at the The Riviera Resort & Spa in Marfa
at only €170.00 for 2 nights for 2 persons on Half
Board basis. Please contact us for further details on
webmaster@mut.org.mt.
Supreme
Court Says Child's Rights Violated by Strip Search
By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: June 25, 2009
WASHINGTON - A strip search of a 13-year-old girl by officials
at her middle school violated the Constitution, the Supreme
Court ruled Thursday in an 8-to-1 decision.
Jim Wilson/The New York Times
The Supreme Court sided with Savana Redding, now 19, shown
with her mother at the court the day her case was argued in
April.
Related
Court Debates Strip Search of Student (April 22, 2009)
Strip-Search of Girl Tests Limit of School Policy (March 24,
2009)
Supreme Court Sides With Arizona in Language Case (June 26,
2009)
Document File: Safford Unified School District v. April Redding
Blog
The Caucus
The latest on President Obama, the new administration and
other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the
discussion.
" More Politics News
The student, Savana Redding, had been suspected of bringing
prescription-strength ibuprofen to the school, in Safford,
Ariz.
Justice David H. Souter, writing for the majority, said a
search of Ms. Redding's backpack and outer garments did not
offend the Fourth Amendment's ban on unreasonable searches.
But the pills in question, each no stronger than two Advils,
did not justify an "embarrassing, frightening and humiliating
search," Justice Souter wrote.
School officials ordered Ms. Redding, whom another girl had
accused of giving her drugs, to strip to her bra and underpants
and to pull them away from her body, exposing her breasts
and pelvic area. No drugs were found.
The case attracted national attention and gave rise to an
intense debate over how much leeway school officials should
have in enforcing zero-tolerance policies for drugs and violence.
Some parents were outraged by the intrusiveness of the search,
while others worried about tying the hands of school officials
charged with keeping their children safe.
The case also revealed a gender fault line at the court. In
an unusual interview about a pending case, Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg told USA Today in the spring that judging from their
comments at the argument, her colleagues, all men, had failed
to appreciate what Ms. Redding had endured.
"They have never been a 13-year-old girl," Justice
Ginsburg said. "It's a very sensitive age for a girl.
I don't think that my colleagues, some of them, quite understood."
In the end, Justice Ginsburg's view of the constitutionality
of the search prevailed.
But the decision did not offer particularly clear guidance
to school personnel, who were told only to take account of
the extent of danger of the contraband in question and whether
there is good reason to think it is hidden in an intimate
place. So the upshot of the decision in a practical sense
may well be to eliminate strip searches in schools.
"A number of communities have decided that strip searches
in schools are never reasonable and have banned them no matter
what the facts may be," Justice Souter said, citing a
regulation of the New York City Department of Education banning
such searches in all circumstances.
The court stopped short, however, of allowing Ms. Redding's
lawsuit to go forward against the assistant principal who
ordered the search and the two female school officials who
conducted it. The state of the law at the time of the search,
in 2003, was too murky to allow the officials to be sued,
Justice Souter said.
A separate claim against the school district based on its
practices and policies was not part of the district's appeal
to the Supreme Court and will proceed.
Justices Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens would have allowed
the claims against individual school officials to go forward.
"This is, in essence, a case in which clearly established
law meets clearly outrageous conduct," Justice Stevens
wrote.
Only Justice Clarence Thomas would have ruled the search constitutional.
"Preservation of order, discipline and safety in public
schools is simply not the domain of the Constitution,"
he wrote.
Justice Thomas also said Thursday's decision provided the
nation's students a court-sanctioned hiding place.
"Redding would not have been the first person to conceal
pills in her undergarments," he wrote. "Nor will
she be the last after today's decision, which announced the
safest places to secrete contraband in school."
Ms. Redding, now 19, said in a telephone interview that she
was "pretty excited" by the decision. "It makes
me feel good," she said, "that they recognized that
it was against my rights and that it most likely won't happen
to anyone else."
A lawyer for the school district said that the decision "offers
little clarification" concerning when such searches are
allowed and that it could have dangerous consequences.
The decision unduly limits "the ability of school officials
to protect students from the harmful effects of drugs and
weapons on school campuses," the lawyer, Matthew W. Wright,
said in a statement.
"We can only hope that this decision does not compound
the problem further," Mr. Wright said, "by emboldening
more students to smuggle such contraband into the nation's
schools."
The majority made clear that school searches were subject
to less exacting constitutional standards than those conducted
by the police. Where the police must generally have probable
cause to conduct searches, school officials need have only
"a moderate chance of finding evidence of wrongdoing,"
Justice Souter wrote.
Nor did the majority take issue with the zero-tolerance rule
at Safford Middle School.
"There is no need here either to explain the imperative
of keeping drugs out of schools, or to explain the reasons
for the school's rule banning all drugs, no matter how benign,"
Justice Souter wrote. "Teachers are not pharmacologists
trained to identify pills and powders, and an effective drug
ban has to be enforceable fast."
But a search of the sort Ms. Redding underwent must be supported
by more than another student's accusation, Justice Souter
said.
"The content of the suspicion," he wrote, "failed
to match the degree of the intrusion," particularly given
"the nature and limited threat of the specific drugs"
at issue.
At the argument of the case, Safford Unified School District
v. Redding, No. 08-479, in April, Justice Stephen G. Breyer
suggested that the search of Ms. Redding was in some ways
comparable to her changing into gym clothes.
Thursday's decision took a different approach.
"Changing for gym is getting ready for play," Justice
Souter wrote. "Exposing for a search is responding to
an accusation reserved for suspected wrongdoers and fairly
understood as so degrading" that many schools never allow
the practice.
_________________________________________________________
Please
note that the Teachers' Institute has two fully equipped classrooms
which can be utilized by MUT members at a discounted price.
Please contact us for further details on webmaster@mut.org.mt.
_________________________________________________________
Click
here to download latest MUT circular
_________________________________________________________
Church
Authorities Ratify Documents on Supply Category and KGAs
The
Church Authorities have ratified the documents concerning
the above
signed between the Government and the MUT.
These
conditions now apply for these grades in Church Schools.
Kindly
view the Memoranda below:
Click
here to download Memoranda of Understanding on the Supply
Category
Click
here to download Memoranda of Understanding on Kindergarten
Assistants
_________________________________________________________
Click
here to download latest Church Schools Agreement
_________________________________________________________