Comments on: SCOTUS Returns to Sanity in School Strip Search Case

By: SC

SC — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:42:02 +0000

Exactly. Just because someone is a minor doesn’t mean that they have no rights.

By: tfr

tfr — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:09:56 +0000

> I don’t think ANY school official ought to have the authority to strip search, at least not without having a law enforcement representative present and in agreement that it’s necessary.

And having a valid search warrant in hand. Simple due process.

By: Akston

Akston — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 04:25:15 +0000

Thanks for posting this one. I needed a bit of good news.

Lately, stories like these are springs in a desert of callous disregard for personal liberty. There seems to be endless euphoric support for smiling bureaucrats who promise temporary safety at the expense of essential liberties.

That French guy, François-Marie Arouet, said it pretty well: “It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.”

And a quote long in disuse from me: “Thank you, Supreme Court”

By: SC

SC — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:58:18 +0000

The court didn’t totally rule out the possibility of strip searching students, but they did at least add some sanity to the process by stating that the school must have reasonable area-specific information to act upon before doing so (in other words, have reasonably reliable information that drugs are being hidden in a student’s bra). I still don’t think that’s adequate, myself – I don’t think ANY school official ought to have the authority to strip search, at least not without having a law enforcement representative present and in agreement that it’s necessary. School administrators should not have police powers.

By: Red

Red — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:39:03 +0000

Searched, nay STRIP-SEARCHED for IBUPROFEN. Advil. Effing advil people! Geez. I miss ‘common’ sense.