Zep wrote: 
And what warrants a "very high probable cause of suspicion" in these cases? Unfortunately, because this would involve subjective criteria, there is a lot of gray area and it could wind up causing a lot more problems if school administration/faculty is allowed to determine what those "criteria of suspicion" actually are. 

 Zep wrote: 
The kid ended up with PTSD and had to go to a new school.  Honors student.  Forking insane. 

 meower wrote: 
Yes this case is really fucked.  I can't see a right of strip search against students unless maybe weapons are involved, and there should be a very high probable cause of suspicion. The Court has fashioned such tests in the past, and they have an opportunity to do so in this case.

Unfortunately, the Court will probably take the safe exit and simply uphold the school district's search rights (or maybe find for the appellee, you never know!).  In any event, I tell my daughter that she should vehemently decline strip searches, even if it means going to jail.

 Lazy8 wrote: 

 That isn't how it works.

 They do what they are told by their owners.

 Zep wrote: 
this story is unbelievable isnt it? 

Not a ruling, but a gem (such as it is) from yesterday:

"You search in the student's pack, you search the student's outer garments, and you have a reasonable suspicion that the student has drugs."

"Don't you have, after conducting all these other searches, a reasonable suspicion that she has drugs in her underpants?"

"You've searched everywhere else. By God, the drugs must be in her underpants."

-Justice Antonin Scalia, while hearing oral arguments on Safford Unified School District v. Redding.