CategoriesJoin Us At:
|
VICTORY! Supreme Court Finds Strip-Search of 13-Year Old Girl UnconstitutionalThe Supreme Court today ruled that school officials violated the constitutional rights of a 13-year-old Arizona girl when they strip searched her based on a classmate's uncorroborated accusation that she previously possessed ibuprofen. The ACLU's Drug Law Reform Project represented April Redding, the plaintiff in the lawsuit, whose daughter, Savana Redding, was strip searched by Safford Middle School officials six years ago. Adam Wolf, an attorney with the ACLU who argued the case before the Court, said today: We are pleased that the Supreme Court recognized that school officials had no reason to strip search Savana Redding and that the decision to do so was unconstitutional. Today's ruling affirms that schools are not constitutional dead zones. While we are disappointed with the Court's conclusion that the law was not clear before today and therefore school officials were not found liable, at least other students will not have to go through what Savana experienced.We'll have more soon. In the meantime, please send a message thanking Savana and April for standing up for all students' rights.
Tags: U.S. Supreme Court
We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are requests for legal assistance and postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability.
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites. We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published. Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section. 1 Response to "VICTORY! Supreme Court Finds Strip-Search of 13-Year Old Girl Unconstitutional" |
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
Jun 26th, 2009 at 8:42pm
If this had been a 13-year old boy instead of a 13-year old girl, would the matter have gotten any attention from the ACLU (much less the Supreme Court)? Young boys are preyed upon by middle-aged school teachers almost with regularity, and society snickers. A young girl gets peeked past her panties and it goes to the highest court in the land. I am glad the ACLU pursued this matter and I am proud of the results for all children, irrespective of gender.