Pain Free with Magnets - Click on link to learn more....

Sorry.

Because the incident in question occurred in Arizona, and I assume that there wasn't as clear a definition of what was and wasn't okay as California's.

If this is California law, how did the courts decide against the family until the case reached the SCOTUS.

(Have I mentioned how I hate rules of financial responsibility based upon emerging, unpredictable principles?)

That said, I aboslutely agree with the opinion that advil is not a good reason to look through panties, although I am not convinced any drug is a good reason to search under a person's clothes.

And I'm skeptical of the claim about private vs. public. Seriously, if I called the cops because the principal at a private school strip searched my child....

Steve, you seem to think a crime has been committed. It is not a crime for a doctor, a school administrator, a p.e. teacher or a parent to order a child to strip unless there is evidence of some sort of lascivious intent. The SCOTUS in this case said there was no doubt in the record that the school administrators were motivated solely to protect students from drugs and getting sick.

The only reason this was in the courts is that public schools are state actors and thus subject to notions of limited government. That means that a Catholic school can ban t-shirts that promote drugs and spanks students, without wondering about the application of the First and Eighth Amendments, or litigation from them.

I just find the outrage to be largely misdirected into the court system unless people believe it's no problem for private schools to do this.

Parents are known to overreact to protect their children from danger, and a school official with responsibility for safety may tend to do the same. The difference is that the Fourth Amendment places limits on the official...

Sure didn't work in this case.

And I'm skeptical of the claim about private vs. public. Seriously, if I called the cops because the principal at a private school strip searched my child including viewing his unclothed pelvic area the response would be: switch schools or get the policies changed? I'm thinking that is the least likely response.

Here's a serious non-snide question:

1. How frequent are strip searches at public schools.
2. How frequent are strip searches at private schools.

No school employee shall conduct a search that involves:
(a) Conducting a body cavity search of a pupil manually or with an instrument.
(b) Removing or arranging any or all of the clothing of a pupil to permit a visual inspection of the underclothing, breast, buttocks, or genitalia of the pupil.

Again, I ask, is that so hard to write?

What's nice about such a law is that the school can't be sued for failing to do these things when a student gets injured.

If this had happened in a typical private school, the parents would have the choice of changing schools or lobbying for better policies. In public schools they have the same options, plus they can seek judicial intervention under the Constitution.

From the opinion:

Parents are known to overreact to protect their children from danger, and a school official with responsibility for safety may tend to do the same. The difference is that the Fourth Amendment places limits on the official...

Revised Memo to Perverts: Become a PUBLIC school official so you can rummage through children's underwear all you want.

And people might think I'm being sarcastic...well I am, but and this is a huge but...the school's attorney actually argued there is no legal barrier to doing body cavity searches.

Enroll your child in public school and you give permission for a school official to insert a gloved finger into his or her anus, and her vagina. I think that for most parent's here the response, and it is a proper response IMO, would be to tear the head off any such school official who did such a thing.

That raises a huge flag to me about the limitations of having courts decide these issues on constitutional grounds.