The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I am assuming youare making the idiotic assertion that the Fourth even applies to this instance in the first place. (here is a little hint...It applies to evidentiary circumstances...I.E. some reason for being adjudicated...)
Don't get all high & mighty on her yet, tomkat. The Supreme Court has routinely held that a school's interest in maintaining order and discipline sometimes trumps the student's 1st and 4th Amendment (and other)rights---black armbands during a VN protest in the '60s rings a bell. It's a balancing act, true, but generally speaking, the "individual" rights of students participating in school sponsored/school sanctioned events lose out if a school can make a compelling case that its action was necessary to ensure the proper order and discipline of the school or the event.I believe this woman may have been a bit overzealous w/the actual, physical "thong check," but I believe she had every right to enforce a no-thong rule at a school dance. If the parents bring this action and it actually gets to a court, I'll bet a C-note right now w/anyone here that the school ultimately triumphs.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Well..........if I could check thong underwear on high school girls, I would risk a seizure.
KIDDING!
Walt