Mini list week 6 +
Limitations on Strip Searches of Students
Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding – A 13 year old middle school girl was suspected
by the school officials for having drugs. A planner was found of hers that had several knives and
cigarette, lighters, and other contrabands. She denied that they were hers. They also suspected
her friend of having drugs. They asked the friend to empty out her pockets, and they found the
drugs. They strip searched her, and found no more. They then searched Redding, and found no
drugs, strip search and still found no drugs. Although the school was acting within reasonable
suspicion, the strip search was an unreasonable compared to the nature of the crime. (Look at
Suspicion less Safety Searches in Airports, Subways, Public Buildings, etc
US v. Marquez (2005) – Man was at an airport, and he was picked randomly to search. They
found two kilograms of cocaine stashed in his pants. It was a legal search because society does
not see baggage or self as a subject to privacy in an airport.
US v. Davis (1973) – Airport screening are considered to be administrative searches because they
are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme to prevent the carrying of weapons or
explosives aboard aircraft.
US v. Hartwell (2006) – when defendant set off the magnetometer, wand inspection was
reasonable, stating that the search is less offensive because air passengers are on notice that they
will be searched.
US v. Aukai (2007) – Mr. Aukai was subjected to a 2
inspection at the airport because he had no
ID. In the middle of the 2
search, he wanted to not go through it and wanted to opt not to fly.
The TSA continued to search him, and found drugs. Courts held this was reasonable, because the
searches are not based on consent, they are based on “attempted entry.” Once someone tries to go
in, then they can be forced to go through. Terrorist could use the “opt not to fly” as a cheap
alternative to scout out the security system of the airport for flaws. We don’t want that.
MacWade v. Kelly (2006) – Random searches on subway passengers were reasonable to prevent
terrorist constituted a special need that is distinct from ordinary post hoc criminal investigation.
It showed that government interest in searching was immediate and substantial, and searches
were minimally intrusive (people may decline searches as long as they leave subway and police
can only search containers capable of concealing explosives, and they last only a few seconds,
uniformed personnel will conduct them out in the open which reduces fear and stigma that
removal to a hidden area can cause.
Cassidy v. Chertoff (2006) – Searches on Ferries were constitutional because ferries are mass
transportation, and it could be a terrorist target, but it is definitely part of the nationwide security
policy that includes suspicionless searches
Johnston v. Tampa Bay Sports Authority (2008) – pat-downs at security searches at the Super