Vernonia School District v. Acton Assignment
Link ---- https://www(dot)law(dot)cornell(dot)edu/supremecourt/text/515/646
OVERVIEW
A case brief is a dissection of a legal opinion, containing a written summary of the basic components of that decision. “Briefing” a case (opinion) helps the student understand the rule of law as interpreted by that particular court.
INSTRUCTIONS
Each student will carefully read a legal opinion (Vernonia School District v. Acton). Upon reading said case, each student will complete a case brief following the instructions outlined below.
After reading and analyzing the case, address the following issues:
1. Do you believe that the original intent of the Fourth Amendment was to encompass searches of students in public schools?
2. Should professional athletes be held up as role models for children with respect to issues dealing with morality and ethics?
3. Did you agree or disagree with the Court’s rationale in deciding the case?
4. Which authority should have jurisdiction (power/authority) over the issue of drugs in athletics/schools? Civil government, Church, Family, Self?
5. Reflect on the case in light of the truths outlined in the Christian worldview. Support your position using various Christian sources (e.g. Scripture, Catechisms, historic Christian Creeds, etc.).
Your paper must be completed based on the following criteria:
3 full pages;
2 scholarly citations;
1-inch margins;
Double-spaced;
12-point, Times New Roman font;
Put a title on the top line of the first page, and include your name. No other identifying information is needed. Do not include a separate cover page. Citations must be in APA format and included on a separate reference page.
Review Case Brief Grading Rubric for specific point totals.
Note: Your assignment will be checked for originality via the Turnitin plagiarism tool.
Student Name
1. No, the Fourth Amendment was not intended to cover searches of students in public schools. The Supreme Court applied Fourth Amendment principles to school searches. It has recognized the need to balance students' privacy interests against the school's security in maintaining a safe and orderly learning environment. The Amendment was aimed at protecting citizens from unreasonable searches. Its discussion showed that the citizens have the right to security and their belongings. In this case, no searches should be carried out, and in case of one, a warrant should be issued with probable cause and supported by an oath that designates the area to be investigated and the things or persons to be held (Vernon School District v. Acton, 1995). Looking at students in public schools, the Court recognized that the learners have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Still, the expectation is reduced due to the school's role of maintaining an orderly and safe learning environment. The Supreme Court stated that random drug testing of student-athletes did not violate the Amendment because the search was reasonable where the school had the role of preventing drug use among student-athletes. It is because these students are seen as role models in the school society.
2. Society usually views talented individuals as role models among children. In some cases, role models are good examples, but regarding molarity and integrity, qualified athletes can be considered role models for children. These athletes are considered heroes in the community because they have attained huge successes through hard work, dedication, and discipline. The athletes' deeds can inspire children, thus making them strive for excellence and to grow a strong work ethic. Many professional athletes are not involved in scandals and controversies that may raise serious questions concerning their characters and morals. Society should recognize that professional athletes are experts who excel at their sport as they have the knowledge to guide complex ethical issues (Piccolo, 2020). Children should look up to trusted professionals with good morals and ethics. Children need guidance from recommended individuals because professional athletes are admirable for their dedication and hard work and who can help them develop a strong moral compass that will serve them well throughout their lives.
3. I agree with the Court's justification because the random drug-testing policy was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Society is experiencing a high rise in drug use among the youths, and as a result, schools would be required to carry out drug tests among the learners. It's also important for student-athletes to regularly submit to drug testing as a condition of participation in school athletics. The case was set after the school district passed the rule of drug-testing policy for st...