Question: What do FReepers Think About This?

me ^ | 23 September 2002 | me

[JediGirl]

From my friend's weblog:

1) During routine fire drills last week, campus safety unlocked all our rooms and searched thoroughly (even to the point of going through drawers and into our closets) for "illegal" things such as candles (fire hazards), alcohol, drug-related paraphanelia.. etc which were then confisciated. It's causing tremendous outrage because of the invasion of privacy. It all boils down to what the school considers to be their property. I feel that yes, this is school property, but we do pay to live here which should warrant us some property rights. Yes, we did sign a contract which stated we were not to have such items in our rooms... but this issue could have been dealt with much better. How does ransacking through students' belongings while they unknowingly stood outside during a firedrill cater to the trust and community spirit that this school builds and thrives upon?

[DoughtyOne]

If it took place in a dorm full of kids under 18, it is the institution's duty to make sure the minors are not participating in illegal activity. I would give every parent the same right and think the school is operating as a proxy for the parents in their absense.

If it is happening to people over 18 it is wrong.

I know a lot of people will disagree with regard to the kids under 18, but I have never felt that kids should be given blanket coverage under the constitution due to parental rights to protect them from themselves until they are of age.

[dark_lord]

First, as has already been pointed out, Freepers are for property rights unless it involves "dope", in which case yer all leftist slacker hippies and should leave the country or die.

Second, unlike a standard rental arrangement, colleges have certain legal obligations related to their students that make them different than a standard landlord. It is because most students are not yet 21 years of age. In some states it is codified as "in loco parentis" or something like that. The bottom line is they do have the right to search the dorm rooms, and if you don't like it you can find an apartment off campus. For example, depending on the laws of your state and municipality, you have the right to store:
(a) a handgun,
(b) an automobile flare,
(c) a bottle of wine,
(d) a coffemaker,
(e) a microwave

in your apartment off campus, but possibly none of those in your dorm room.

[JediGirl]

Here is the housing contract:

http://onthehill.hamilton.edu/college/residential_life/housing/contracts/housing.pdf

[jlogajan]

Bottom line. It stinks, but there is probably not a whole lot the students can do about it.

Possibly not in the legal venue (depending on contractual terms) but everything can be negotiated -- if you make a big enough stink.

[DoughtyOne]

Constituional rights supercede any signed agreement. The requirement of someone to sign away their Constitutional rights to live somewhere represents duress to my way of thinking. The agreement isn't worth the paper it's written on.

Imagine a landlord demanding that a black renter agree not to use the white laundry room before being allowed to rent. Think that paper would stand up in court?

[jlogajan]

The contract incorporates by reference the Student Handbook. So that would have to be scrutinized as well.

[leadpenny]

AM, I would think if you put this thread on the back burner and left the "Who's your favorite FOX personality thread" on the main board, you're dealing in a double standard. IMO.

[jlogajan]

Constituional rights supercede any signed agreement.

That's not true at all. I may have "freedom of speech" but I've signed corporate agreements in which I cannot speak ill of the company (whether truthful or not) as a condition of employement or severance package. These are binding and can be upheld in court.

[DoughtyOne]

As a full-time enrolled student at Hamilton College, I understand that I am expected to reside in College housing and participate in the meal plan. I understand and agree that I am responsible for all rules and regulations as outlined in the Hamilton Student Handbook and hereby understand and agree to abide by the terms and conditions as set forth in the Residential Life Policies and Procedures section of the handbook.

The right to inspection of personal property isn't established by this housing agreement.  However that may be covered in the handbook.

P.S.  I'm not an attorney.  I'm only giving my gutt feeling on this.

[JediGirl]

: Access to Student Rooms by College Officials-The College reserves the right to enter student rooms to perform routine maintenance, to inspect for fire, health or safety hazards, to investigate misuse or misappropriation of College or other property, and in the event of a missing student or for that student's health and welfare.

From the handbook @ http://www.hamilton.edu/college/Student_Handbook/2002-2003/

So I guess that's it. Thanks for the responses. I should have done a bit more digging.

[leadpenny]

Thank you.

[DoughtyOne]

If you had defended a company requirement that you to sign an agreement to not disclose proprietary information, I'd agree.  I don't believe a company has a constitutional right to demand you abrogate your rights to be truthful about it's possible criminal behavior.  Essentially that is what they are requiring here, whether that was the initial intent or not.  The dismissal of you for related reasons would certainly be subject to vigorous legal opposition.

[JediGirl]

I just ran across this:

Health and Safety Inspections-Resident advisors conduct health and safety inspections each semester. Students will be notified in advance of the inspections. Once completed, students will be asked to correct health and safety violations immediately. Students who refuse to correct a violation will be subject to disciplinary action.

[DoughtyOne]

While my arguement might stand on it's merits, it's essentially mute.  Businesses can let employees go for no cause.  What they generally do is claim elimination of a position, then they hire a new employee and create a new position that does the same exact tasks.  Employees seldom have the resources or time to respond in court.

[DoughtyOne]

If you would have addressed a general inspection of your room, I would agree with the housing authorities ability to inspect. If you're talking about your drawers, I do NOT agree that they have a right to inspect. And no, not those drawers...

[DoughtyOne]

I would add this to my comments. The school authorities could ask the local police to obtain a warrant and inspect your personal belongings if they suspected felonious activity. I would object to a general abuse of your personal rights through property inspection without just cause or due process.

[blau993]

Ability to negotiate is heavily dependent on leverage. Unless things have changed a whole lot since I was in college, students don't have much leverage when they deal with the university.

[jlogajan]

Ability to negotiate is heavily dependent on leverage. Unless things have changed a whole lot since I was in college, students don't have much leverage when they deal with the university.

In realistic terms the best students could hope for would be a schedule (rather than random or unannounced) inspection. I doubt there is great love in the college staff for storm-trooper tactics in general. So it might not be that hard of a sell.

[blau993]

Constituional rights supercede any signed agreement.

I agree with that as a general proposition. What you are likely to find in this situation, however, is that a court would say the university had a right to reasonably inspect the rooms for unsafe conditions and material and that the students, warned in advance of this right of inspection, (a) had no expectation of privacy, and (b) had consented to the searches.

[DoughtyOne]

I believe that the students have a very potent leverage. As a student body, if they inform the faculty that a large percentage of them will not return to the campus the following cemester, you can bet a reasonable resolution that honored student rights would be found. At least that's my perception.