CITIZEN ADVOCACY CENTER

THE FOURTH AMENDMENT: SEARCH & SEIZURE 

 

LESSON AND ACTIVITIES

Grade Level: 9, 10, 11, 12

 

Subject(s):

 

Duration:  1 to 2 class sessions

 

Description:  Lesson explores the meaning and application of the 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution utilizing the Supreme Court case New Jersey v. T.L.O

 

Goals: 

ISBE Standards:

1.  Social Science

·        14A: Understand and explain basic principles of the United States government.

 

  1. English/Language Arts

·        1A:  Apply word analysis and vocabulary skills to comprehend selections.

·        3B:  Compose well-organized and coherent writing for specific purposes and audiences.

·        4A:  Listen effectively in formal and informal situation

·        4B:  Speak effectively using language appropriate to the situation and audience

 

Objectives:

1.      Students will voice their perceptions as to the meaning of the 4th Amendment.

2.      Students will brainstorm the meaning of 4th Amendment vocabulary such as “unreasonable,” “search,” “seizure,” and “probable cause.”

3.      Students will analyze a case study; debate both sides of a legal issue applying their understanding of the 4th Amendment to the facts of the case study.

4.      Students will compare how different people react to a situation.

 

Materials:

    1. Pens/Pencils
    2. Paper
    3. Classroom board
    4. Copies of 4th Amendment Handout (one per student)
    5. Copies of case study (one per student)

 

 Instruction and Activities:

 

Anticipatory set:

  1. Write on the board prior to class the below statement. Ask students to journal as response. 
    1. What does it mean that the government shall not perform an unreasonable search and seizure?

 Lecture Section:

  1. As a class, read and discuss the 4th Amendment (by writing it on the board or passing out the attached handout) focusing on the following questions:
    1. What is meant by the terms:

1.                  Unreasonable – not fair, proper, or just;  appropriate under the circumstances

2.                  Search – looking for something not otherwise in view in order to find something

3.                  Seizure – forcible taking possession of property (personal or otherwise)

4.                  Probable cause – reasonable cause;  having more evidence for the search than against it as in a balancing test;  if in looking at all of the evidence available, a reasonable person would agree that a search, seizure or arrest was warranted.

    1. Who is protected by the 4th Amendment?  A: Every resident of the US whether they are citizens or not.

c.   Does the Fourth Amendment apply to all searches and seizures?  A: No, an action by the state or an agent of the state is needed.  For example, a private school principal would not be governed by the 4th Amendment, but a public school principal would be governed by the 4th Amendment because s/he is considered an agent of the state.

 

  1.  Break down the Fourth Amendment language (see attached handout).

 4.  TLO Case study.

    1. Review facts.
    2. Assign half the groups to represent the view of the school officials. The other half of the groups represents the view of the student.
    3. Have each student individually read the case study.
    4. Explain to the students that they will be using the 4th Amendment and not their personal view to decide whether the search of the student’s handbag was reasonable.
    5. Each small group should brainstorm the following questions with one student from each group recording the main discussion points.

                                                               i.      What right is at issue in the case study?

                                                             ii.      Do students have a right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure while at school?

                                                            iii.      Does the answer to question (ii) depend on whether the student attends private or public school? Why or why not?

                                                           iv.      Would the situation have been different if the teacher had not seen the student smoking, but just thought she was a “bad kid who probably smoked?

                                                             v.      Would your opinion in this case change if the student were seen smoking off-campus only?

                                                           vi.      (For groups representing the student) On what grounds would you argue that the search was unlawful?

                                                          vii.      (For groups representing the school officials) On what grounds would you argue the search was lawful?

                                                        viii.      Do you think there is a difference between the search of a student’s purse and the search of a student’s locker? Why or why not?

 

After about twenty minutes, pair groups up, a group representing the school officials with a group representing the student and have the groups discuss their response to the questions with the teacher only cueing students as needed.

 

 

Tying it all Together:

Have a guest community lawyer or school administrator visit the class to discuss the case.

 

 

TLO Case study:

 

            A teacher at a New Jersey high school discovered a 14-year-old freshman smoking cigarettes in a school lavatory in violation of a school rule, and took her to the Principal's office.  The student denied to the principal that she had been smoking, and the principal demanded to see her purse. Upon opening the purse, he found a pack of cigarettes and also noticed a package of cigarette rolling papers that are commonly associated with the use of marijuana. He then proceeded to search the purse thoroughly and found some marijuana, a pipe, plastic bags, a fairly substantial amount of money, an index card containing a list of students who owed the student money, and two letters that implicated her in marijuana dealing. Thereafter, the State brought delinquency charges against respondent in the Juvenile Court.

 

1.                  What right is in issue here?

2.                  Do students maintain these rights in school?

3.                  Are school officials extensions of the state?

4.                  What arguments would the school/school board use in favor of this search?  What are the school’s interests in having this search?

5.                  What arguments would the student use against the search?  What interests does the student have in preventing the search?

6.                  Would the situation have been different if the teacher had not seen the student smoking, but just thought that she was a “bad kid” who probably smoked?

7.                  Would your opinion of this case change if the student was seen smoking off-campus?

8.                  How would you decide this case?  Should the evidence in the student’s purse be suppressed?  The cigarettes?  How about the marijuana paraphernalia? 

9.                  Is there a difference between a search of the student’s purse and the search of a locker?

 

 

  

Case Study Analysis

 

Rights invoked:

      Freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures.

 

Case:  New Jersey v. T.L.O, 469 U.S. 325 (1985).

 

      Held:

 

      Schoolchildren have legitimate expectations of privacy while at school.  The Fourth Amendment protects students against unreasonable actions of the state and all of its arms, including the Board of Education.  The Board of Education must act within the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  In determining the validity of a search, the court must weigh the privacy right of the student against the interest of the school in maintaining discipline and promoting education.  A warrant is not needed in schools because school officials are viewed as students’ guardians while they are in school.  School officials do not have to meet as high of a standard for searches as police, who must have probable cause for a search warrant (a much higher standard than reasonableness).  However, a search must be reasonable, a much lower standard.

 

      A search is permissible if 1)  the measures taken to search are reasonably related to the objectives of the search;  and 2) the search is not excessively intrusive in light of the student’s age, sex, and nature of infraction.  For example, a strip-search or cavity search by a school official for cigarettes would NOT be reasonable in this circumstance.

 

      In this case, the Court held that the search was reasonable for Fourth Amendment

purposes.  First, the initial search for cigarettes was reasonable. The report to the principal that the student had been smoking warranted a reasonable suspicion that she had cigarettes in her purse, and thus the search was justified. The discovery of the rolling papers then gave rise to a reasonable suspicion that respondent was carrying marijuana as well as cigarettes in her purse, and this suspicion justified the further exploration that turned up more evidence of drug-related activities.

 

 

©Copyright 2005 Citizen Advocacy Center.  All rights reserved.  No part of this lesson plan may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the prior, written permission of the Citizen Advocacy Center. The Citizen Advocacy Center is a 501(c)(3) non-pofit, non-partisan community based legal organization. For information about the Center, or to make a tax deductible contribution, visit www.citizenadvocacycenter.org, call 630.833.4080. The Center is located at 238 N. York Rd., Elmhurst IL 60126