Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Law Studies: 2.13

No description
by

Kristina Jordan

on 11 September 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Law Studies: 2.13

2.13
Law Studies:
Module 2 Case Study
by: Kristina Hopwood
Write a brief summary (one paragraph each of 3-5 sentences) of the New Jersey v. T.L.O. and Vernonia v. Acton cases.
How are the cases similar?
These cases are similar because they both revolve around drugs and young students. They are both cases about invasions of privacy and what is "too much" when it comes to searching students belongings and invading their privacy. They are also both cases where the Supreme Court rules in favor of the school.
What are the main arguments for each side in the Vernonia v. Acton case? What details does each side use to support their opinion?
The Acton's believe that their son should not have to partake in the drug test because there is no reasonable suspicion and because it is an invasion of his privacy. They say that there is no evidence that their son uses drugs or alcohol.
Which side in the Vernonia v. Acton case had the stronger argument and why?
I think the Acton side had a stronger argument, however, I definitely think there are some flaws in their argument. The Acton's are right that their son shouldn't have to do the test because there isn't reasonable suspicion, but I don't believing suing the school is the right thing to do. Also, in my opinion, if the James Acton wasn't using drugs or drinking alcohol, then taking a drug test shouldn't have been that big of a deal.
Jersey VS T.L.O: A 14 year old female was caught smoking marijuana in the bathroom of her school. The teacher that catches her searches the student's purse (with permission) and finds other drug paraphernalia. The girl was arrested for possession and dealing marijuana, but then later said that the purse search was a violation of her privacy. The courts, however, believed that the search was justified because of reasonable suspicion.
Vernonia VS Acton: A male seventh grader wants to try out for the football team, but in order to he must do a drug test. His parents believe the test is an invasion of privacy and will not allow their son to go through with it. Because of this, the boy is not allowed to be on the football team. The boy and his parents sue the school. The Supreme Court sides with the
school, believing that the drug testing is a good thing.

The school would not allow James Acton to play football because his parents won't allow him to take a drug test. Drug testing
sports players is a policy at the school.
Full transcript