New Jersey vs. T.L.O.

1.) Within the Fourth Amendment, it states that a person has a right to secure their belongings and it is a violation of this right if they endure unreasonable search and seizures. In the T.L.O. case, Chiplock never asked for her consent to hand over her purse to him, which violated her right to hold onto her personal belongings. Overall, in this case, the Fourth Amendment was violated seeing that the assistant principal did not go through the correct process in order to search through her purse and find the evidence of cigarettes and marijuana.
2.) However, through this we question whether the Fourth Amendment actually applies to the public school system, in which these are the schools funded and owned by the government. I believe since this is government property, if there are any suspicions, implying anything that is not according to the rules set by the school or anything that is seen as illegal, the school authorities do have the right to conduct a reasonable search and seizure of these belongings, disregarding the Fourth Amendment at this moment.
3.) In my opinion, I believe that it was reasonable for Chiplock to search through T.L.O.'s purse. She was only fourteen years old at the time and already she had been introduced into the drug dealing world. If she wasn't searched, she could have possibly continued this habit and could be worse off than where she is now.
4.) With regards to COL High School, I don't see a search quite like this one happening, seeing that the students there are more geared into learning and earning their college degrees rather than being caught fooling around with some drugs in the bathroom. However, if there were ever a time where a search would be needed, I believe that it would be possible. Being on a college campus though, I think that there are no rights for any of the authorities to search the students, seeing that they are considered adults now. Again, if there were to ever be a situation where someone is caught doing something illegal, security would most likely be notified and from there they will decide to conduct any searches or not.
5.) I believe that the Supreme Court should rule against T.L.O. because she was found carrying illegal substances around school, which could possibly harm other students. Also, she was a minor committing criminal acts, so even if her Fourth Amendment rights had been violated, she should still be charged and from this experience she possibly would learn from her mistakes, where if she had not been charged, she would only learn that she can get away with committing more felonies and making herself oblivious to what the Law says.