The exact limits of a public school's authority to search mobile devices, to handle events that have partially occurred outside school, has not been established.
As the document shows, many instances of schools searching students' mobile devices without a warrant have been shown to be constitutional in appellate courts.
> been shown to be constitutional in appellate courts.
So has civil asset forfeiture but that doesn't actually make it constitutional.
When a agent of the government wants to search mine or the property of my child, I'm going to make them get a warrant every time. I have nothing to hide, but it's not worth the risk of something being misunderstood or misinterpreted and ending up with consequences from this fishing expedition. They can "particularly describe the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized" along with their probable cause on the outset or not search at all. Terrorism isn't a sufficient reason to throw out the constitution, it's laughable to suggest name calling is.
My kid isn't old enough yet but stuff like this, monitoring software on laptop used for school (but purchased by parents) pushes me towards homeschooling.
> So has civil asset forfeiture but that doesn't actually make it constitutional.
I don't feel like semantic arguments. If an agent of the state engages in behavior that appellate courts have declared to be legal, you are unlikely to get redress by reporting this act to the police.
They school won't be able to get into the phone, they will have no choice but to call the police if they want to view the contents. That way my attorney can get involved and ensure the search is conducted properly.
So that isn't what the document says. Out of 5 cases, only two were constitutional. Both of those were allowed to confirm that a disallowed activity had happened during school.
Specifically in Mendoza vs Klein ISD (from the paper) we see that the continued search of the phone after confirmation of texting in class was ruled unconstitutional.
Yes, this pretty clearly establishes there's bounds: the search has to be tailored in scope to address a reasonable suspicion of a violation of school policy.
Can a school have a policy about cyberbullying outside of school, and pursue a search in that case? This is untested.
As I said:
"The exact limits of a public school's authority to search mobile devices, to handle events that have partially occurred outside school, has not been established."
I believe the comment has been edited since I replied, but... in any case.
> Whether or not they have it is no excuse. It is MY device. MY rights have been firmly established.
If your student takes "your" backpack to school, and there's a reason to search it, the fact that it is "your" property will not affect things much.
This is a highly dubious legal theory. Fourth amendment decisions about search of property on one's person basically never have to do with actual ownership.
(There are some exceptions, but generally to the detriment of the rights of the person/property being searched).
The backpack is a different case - the contents of the backpack are clearly germaine to school property.
But that isn't true for a mobile device that contains none-school contents. Eg, does a student bringing their phone to school mean that a school can search their financial records through their mobile banking app? Digital diary? Electronic health records?
> Eg, does a student bringing their phone to school mean that a school can search their financial records through their mobile banking app? Digital diary? Electronic health records?
The document that I have linked previously in this thread pretty clearly shows what circumstances have been judged appropriate to search from the outset, and where administrators have overstepped their bounds in continuing.
The specific case of social-media-outside-school-hours-but-relating-to-school is untested.
"• Assuming a search is justified, to avoid a constitutional violation, school officials must
tailor the search to the specific circumstances that prompted the search. In other words,
school officials cannot turn a justified search into a “fishing expedition” to discover
evidence of wrongdoing. According to Mendoza v. Klein Independent School District
(2011), “a continued search must be reasonable and related to the initial reason to search or
to any additional ground uncovered during the initial search.”"