New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)

Reading:

Background Information

Understanding the facts and constitutional questions

🔗 Connecting to Our Guiding Question

When, if ever, should the government be allowed to limit a person's constitutional rights in order to protect the community?

This case asks: Should schools be able to limit students' Fourth Amendment privacy rights (by searching without warrants) to protect the school community from drugs and rule violations? Consider how this case balances individual privacy rights against the school's responsibility to maintain a safe learning environment.

What Happened?

In March 1980, a teacher at Piscataway High School in New Jersey discovered two girls smoking cigarettes in a school restroom. Smoking was allowed in designated areas of the school, but not in the restrooms.

The teacher brought both students to the principal's office to meet with Assistant Vice Principal Theodore Choplick. One of the girls immediately admitted to smoking. The other girl, a 14-year-old freshman referred to in court records as T.L.O. (to protect her privacy as a minor), denied smoking in the restroom and claimed she did not smoke at all.

Mr. Choplick did not believe T.L.O.'s denial. He demanded to see her purse. When T.L.O. handed over her purse, Choplick opened it and immediately saw a pack of cigarettes. He also noticed cigarette rolling papers, which are commonly associated with marijuana use.

Suspecting that T.L.O. might have drugs, Choplick conducted a more thorough search of her purse and found: - A small amount of marijuana - A pipe used for smoking marijuana - Empty plastic bags typically used for drug sales - A substantial amount of money - An index card with names of students who owed T.L.O. money - Two letters that implicated T.L.O. in marijuana dealing

Choplick called T.L.O.'s mother and contacted the police. At the police station, T.L.O. confessed to selling marijuana at school. The state of New Jersey brought delinquency charges against her in juvenile court.

T.L.O.'s lawyer argued that the evidence found in her purse should not be allowed in court because the search violated her Fourth Amendment rights. The lawyer claimed that Choplick had no right to search her purse without a warrant.

The Big Question

Can school officials search students' personal belongings without a warrant? What level of suspicion do school officials need before conducting a search?

What You Need to Know

The Fourth Amendment says:

"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..."

This usually means police need a warrant from a judge before searching someone's belongings. However, schools have special responsibilities for student safety and supervision.

Important Facts

  • T.L.O. was caught violating a school rule (smoking in restroom)
  • She denied smoking and claimed she never smoked
  • The initial search immediately revealed cigarettes, contradicting her denial
  • The discovery of rolling papers gave reasonable suspicion of drug possession
  • The more thorough search revealed evidence of drug dealing
  • Students have some Fourth Amendment rights, but schools have special authority

Vocabulary

Reasonable Suspicion: A belief based on specific facts that someone may be breaking the law
Probable Cause: A higher standard requiring strong evidence that a crime has been committed
In Loco Parentis: "In place of parents" - the legal doctrine that schools act as temporary guardians
Warrant: A document signed by a judge authorizing a search
Exclusionary Rule: The legal principle that illegally obtained evidence cannot be used in court

Argument Sorting Activity

Work with your group to sort these arguments

Instructions: Read each argument below and select which side it helps from the dropdown menu. When you're finished, click "Check Answers" to see your results.

The Two Sides

Argument Answer
Schools have special responsibilities for student safety that require flexibility.
The Fourth Amendment protects all people, including students, from unreasonable searches.
The "in loco parentis" principle gives schools authority to act like parents in supervising students.
School officials are government employees and should need warrants just like police officers.
T.L.O. was caught violating a school rule and then lied about her smoking habits.
Students should not lose their constitutional rights when they enter school.
The search immediately revealed cigarettes, proving that T.L.O. had lied about not smoking.
The search went beyond what was necessary to investigate the original smoking violation.
Finding rolling papers gave reasonable suspicion that T.L.O. might possess drugs.
Allowing warrantless searches gives school officials too much power over students.
Students are minors who need more supervision and guidance than adults.
Evidence obtained through illegal searches should not be allowed in court.
School officials need to be able to investigate rule violations quickly to maintain order.
T.L.O.'s purse was her private property and should have been protected from search.

Key Terms for Arguments

Important concepts to understand when debating this case

Balancing Test

Weighing student privacy rights against schools' need to maintain safety and order.

Special Needs

The legal doctrine that some government institutions (like schools) have unique requirements that justify different Fourth Amendment standards.

Reasonable Scope

The idea that searches must be limited to what is necessary to address the suspected violation.

Connecting to Today

How these constitutional questions still matter

Student privacy and school safety continue to be hotly debated topics. Consider these modern situations:

Technology

Cell Phone Searches

Schools increasingly want to search students' phones for evidence of cheating, cyberbullying, or threats. Phones contain far more personal information than a purse ever could.

Think about: Should phones have more protection than backpacks because they contain so much personal data?

School Safety

Metal Detectors and Bag Checks

Many schools have installed metal detectors or conduct random bag searches to prevent weapons from entering. Some argue this is necessary for safety; others say it treats all students like suspects.

Think about: Does searching everyone equally make it more fair, or does it still violate privacy?

Current Debate

Drug Testing Programs

Some schools require random drug testing for students who participate in sports or other activities. Students must agree to potential searches as a condition of participation.

Think about: If you "choose" to participate in activities, have you given up your right to privacy?

Discussion Questions

  • Should schools be able to search your phone the same way they can search your locker?
  • How do we balance the need for school safety with students' privacy rights?
  • Does the "reasonable suspicion" standard make sense in an age of school violence, or should schools have more or less power to search?

Additional Resources

Go deeper with these resources

🎧 Audio

Oyez Case Summary and Audio

Listen Now →
📺 Video

U.S. Courts Educational Video

Watch Now →
🎧 Audio

U.S. Courts Podcast

Listen Now →
📄 Document

Facts and Case Summary

Read Now →