The United States’ Constitution was written in 1787, and in the time since then there have been twenty-seven amendments made to it. These amendments were further edited over the years as Supreme Court cases were held to resolve problems faced by our country. Perhaps the most important amendment is the fourth amendment, which protects American citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures, meaning no one can be searched by anyone without a warrant. This amendment was added in 1791, and was last revised quite recently in 1992.
The Fourth Amendment is extremely important to American history. With this amendment, the basis of the American legal system was set down. The Fourth Amendment not only explains that people are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures, but it also states the rights of the involved person or people, and also the responsibilities of the involved law-enforcement officials. This amendment is one of the most important because without it, any government official would be able to barge straight through your door and arrest you without providing an explanation. The reason for the creation of this amendment starts back before the American Revolution. Before the colonies declared their independence, they were under the control of the British King George III. When the colonists started creating their own goods in order to avoid the king’s high taxes, King George passed laws that basically made it completely legal for the king’s agents to search any of the colonists property looking for illegally made items. For obvious reasons, the colonists strongly resented this, and so after the Revolution, they remembered these searches when writing the Constitution, and made this amendment to ensure that they could never happen in the newborn United States of America.
Over the past couple hundred years, the Fourth Amendment has been altered many times as complications arose via Supreme Court Cases. One of these influential court cases is Mapp versus Ohio. In this case, which occurred in 1957, police invaded Dollree Mapp’s house and searched through it without providing any form of warrant. The police stated they were looking for a suspect from a bombing, and they did not find this suspect. However, they did find her to possess lot of pornography, which is illegal in Ohio. Mapp was arrested because of this. This conviction was taken to Ohio’s Court, where they realized that the search went against the law, but Mapp was still convicted anyways because at the time, the states were not forced to follow this rule exclusively. Four years later in 1961, arguments were heard and eventually the Supreme Court changed the decision of the Ohio Court. Justice Tom C. Clark, representing the majority, argued that evidenced gathered through an unlawful search cannot be used in a court because it was gained unconstitutionally. John Marshall Harlan countered this, and he stated that unwarranted searches did not cover the right to privacy, which did not need to be established by the federal court. This case is important because in the end, the Supreme Court ruled that anything gathered while violating the Fourth Amendment absolutely cannot be used as evidence in state courts. This revises the original amendment, which stated that the information cannot be used in federal courts, but now it is extended to state courts as well.
Another court case that affected the Fourth Amendment was New Jersey versus T.L.O. T.L.O. are the initials of the high school student involved in this case. In 1984, T.L.O. was searched by her school’s officials. Inside her purse, they found a pack of cigarettes, rolling papers, marijuana, and a list of students who owe her money. Because of these findings, T.L.O. was arrested and charged for possession of marijuana. She tried to suppress the evidence, but was denied by the Court of New Jersey. The New Jersey Court decided that the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule can be applied to public school officials. This case was then brought to the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the Supreme Court decided that public school officials are actually allowed to search the students, as long as the reasons for the search are reasonable. In this case, the school had every right to search T.L.O. because they were looking for illegal drugs, and in the end they did find some. This case did not directly alter the amendment, however it clarified the description of it. The case of New Jersey versus T.L.O. made it very clear that schools have the ability to search their students, given that they provide a reasonable argument for why they should do so. The Supreme Court ruled in the way they did because once the school day starts, the school officials are responsible for their students. If they get a suspicion or are told that someone is carrying something potentially dangerous, the school officials have to take action to ensure the school and all of the students in it are safe.
A third Supreme Court case that affected and involved the Fourth Amendment was the case of Safford United School District versus Redding. This case is quite recent, having taken place in 2009. The event that led to this case was that one day during school, a student reported eighth grader Savana Redding to school officials, saying that she had ibuprofen with her. After hearing this, Redding was then strip-searched by officials, as possession of this went against the school’s rules. Redding’s mother sued her school after being searched, claiming that her daughter’s rights protected under the Fourth Amendment were breached. However, when it was brought to the District Court, they found nothing wrong with the search, and that it was completely constitutional as it did not violate the Fourth Amendment at all. They supported this saying that schools are allowed to search students following what was decided in the case New Jersey versus T.L.O. This case was then brought to the Supreme Court, where the justices disagreed. The Supreme Court stated that Redding’s rights were indeed violated when her undergarments were searched for ibuprofen and other pills. In this situation, the school officials did not have a warrant to search her due to her young age and gender. This decision was largely supported by Justice Stevens, who wrote that school officials conducting a naked 13 year old girl is unconstitutional to some degree. Justice Ginsburg agreed with this point made by Justice Stevens. Justice Clarence Thomas, on the other hand, agreed but also disagreed. While he agreed that school officials had the ability to conduct searches, he stated that the administration should not be questioned in the actions taken to protect their school and the students that attend it.
This amendment is absolutely constitutional. Without this amendment, government officials or the police would be able to come into our homes and search it for whatever they wanted. Also, if they found anything they found suspicious, they could arrest us and we could be thrown into jail. Not only does this amendment protect ourselves and our belongings, it also extends to protection within schools. As shown in the Supreme Court Cases New Jersey versus T.L.O. and Safford United School District versus Redding, students are protected from being searched by their school officials to an extent. If the administration finds a reason to search the student, they are allowed to do so and take action wherever is needed. Even though student searches may seem unfair and unconstitutional to some, they are actually quite fair and comply with the Constitution. In the end, school officials are only looking to make sure to keep their school safe for everyone in it, therefore they can take whatever action needed to ensure this protection and safety is always there, as long as they do not go too far with the search, like in the case of Savana Redding.
In conclusion, the Fourth Amendment is very important to the Constitution. It protects American citizens from searches without warrants in their homes and on their property, and students from unreasonable searches in their schools. With this amendment in the Constitution, Americans can live their lives knowing that their rights are always protected, and if they find themselves in a situation where they feel their rights were violated, they can take this to court and fight for the protection of their rights.