New Jersey v. T.L.O. is a Supreme Court case that made its way through the three levels of courts in 1985. The entire dilemma began one day when two girls were caught smoking in a school bathroom by a teacher. The teacher immediately took the two to the vice principal’s office, where they were questioned. One of the girls admitted to smoking, but the other, the girl known as T.L.O., denied it. The principal, Theodore Choplick, seized T.L.O.’s purse and began to rummage through it. Inside, he found cigarettes, rolling paper, a large amount of one dollar bills, a pipe, marijuana, an index card that appeared to be students that owed T.L.O. money, and two letters that applied that T.L.O. was selling marijuana in schools. T.L.O.’s mother was called by Choplick and was asked to take T.L.O. to the Police Office. She willingly did so. Because of her confessions and the evidence against her, New Jersey brought charges against her. In a local court, T.L.O. argued that her rights given by the Fourth …show more content…
They agreed that high schools shouldn’t need a search warrant because students have a reasonable expectation of how they should act during school hours. The possession of cigarettes was contrary to whether she was being truthful or not, and because T.L.O. was immediately taken to the principal’s office, it made sense to think that there was evidence in her belongings. Because of this, Choplick had a reasonable argument to believe that she had cigarettes in her purse, and so it was constitutional to search through her purse. When Choplick searched the purse, the evidence was in plain sight. This is a large exception to the Fourth Amendment, so he did not require a search warrant for the penetrating of T.L.O.’s belongings. Though it was probably not necessary to completely search through T.L.O.’s belongings, Choplick’s actions are protected under the Fourth