Randy Cassingham's Blog

Posted by Jay from California on March 28, 2009:

I do take Professor Arum's point that school officials should not be subject to litigation, much less liability, in marginal situations. But, (1) as the article notes, this is certainly not a marginal case; and (2) it is frightening to contemplate an environment in which those in charge would not recognize this. Also, (3) we do not see the government extending such deference to the actions of private employers -- who are not even subject to the provisions of the Fourth Amendment. Similarly (4) while dissenting Judge Gould concludes that school officials should receive qualified immunity because "the law heretofore did not give adequate guidance" to them, when a private employer is subject to a class action suit on a novel legal theory and is found to have violated a newly-articulated right the employer is liable to pay even greater penalties (the plaintiffs' legal fees enhanced by a "multiplier") precisely because the case was hard for the plaintiffs to win.

One can hope that Supreme Court review will make some inroads here, and if ever a case presented facts which point in that direction this is it.

Posted by Jeffrey, New Jersey on March 28, 2009:

Here in the State of New Jersey, because of court cases in the past, strip searches of children are not permitted for ANY reason. It doesn't matter if the child is suspected of having ILLEGAL drugs or even an ILLEGAL firearm on their body.

Posted by REWINN, Mercer Island on March 28, 2009:

About contacting your Congresscritter:

A quick phonecall to the LOCAL office (not DC) works best because THERE you're a voter to be courted. Be brief, mention the town you live in, be nice & to the point, then move on so you'll go into the day's tally.

Snail mail: 2nd best; HUGE delays as it works through security means it can't be timely.

Email: as noted, better than nothing but not much cuz it's too easy to do.

======

About school boards & other forms of volunteering:

This is very important. While a school board may not find it easy to fire anyone, it's really the only way to modify ZT in your town (...until the Supremes speak up and even then ... who knows?)

Volunteerism is costly; it takes time and effort. That's part of why it's so valuable. And the benefits are many, if nothing else, you meet interesting people and you can actually get stuff done.

=====

About the crime victim here:

I hope Savana blogs or otherwise writes up her experience now that she is beyond the reach of the abusive vice principal. Alternatively, the girl she gave the ibuprofen to should write what it's like to innocently get her friend in trouble (!surely she did not intend this!) This could be very educational for all children, parents and ... who knows ... maybe even a school official.

---

As I read the story, Ms Redding didn't give ibuprofen to anyone; that was a lie told by the girl caught with it to either get Savana in trouble, to protect the actual source, or to remove suspicion from herself. -rc

Posted by Mike - McHenry, IL on March 30, 2009:

The more I read this, the more I'm confused - why was ANY strip search done? As I look at my children, who are approaching their teen years, I find it inconscionable to ask them to submit to a strip search, even if I had to make the request. I understand the whole purpose of the court system is to work out these issues, but I am appalled that it has A) taken 5 years, B) already stated as a matter of record that the search was unjustified, and C) we are still paying our government to talk about it. The end result is (now) a woman with no closure, and a legal process that is feeding on itself at our expense.

If we had to tell the Founding Fathers that their great institution would be debating this issue, I think we would still be a British colony....

Posted by Brandon from South Carolina on March 30, 2009:

I read the story in the Times that you mention in your update, and I noticed the same quote from Arum. Yeah, reasonable people can disagree on damn near anything. Many slaveowners were "reasonable" people. Does that mean they were right in claiming to own human beings? No. Many serial killers are "reasonable" people. Is our criminal justice system flawed in arresting these "reasonable" individuals? No. Maybe he's covering his own tail because he's "strip searched" a student in the past. *fumes* Of course, I'm sure the reason the Times included that quote is that they have to try to be as uninvolved as possible, representing both sides equally... But the fact that he even said that infuriates me.

And the whole thing is outrageous. I was so disgusted by the story... I was sitting at my desk, reading the paper, waiting for my Microeconomics class to start, and I was so angry that I was tearing up. There were tears in my eyes. I can't stand people like this. I'd like to think that if I was, for instance, a superintendent, and this happened, I would do what's right instead of what makes me look better.

That vice principal was wrong, and he needs to pay personally. I don't even think this is zero-tolerance any more. It's an obvious issue of control. He wanted to communicate that he was the one in control of that little girl. Many psychology experts believe that rape is more about conveying dominance than it is about sexual pleasure. They say that's why you hear about heterosexual men raping other men. But that's exactly what happened here, and it's not even too big a jump. Anyone who thinks that this man, if he can even be called that, was right in what he did is a horrible person. I mean it. You are a disgrace to the species. You are a failure as a human being. You're either an apathetic mound of dung (like Richard Arum), or a sensationalist wacko who would do literally anything to keep yourself or other people safe from the rising threat of PRESCRIPTION IBUPROFEN.

With the public outcry that's going to accompany this story being on the FRONT PAGE of the New York Times, there's no way the Supreme Court will rule in the school district's favor, and opponents of ZT will rejoice. Heck, proponents of common sense and of human decency will rejoice. It's just sad that it took this kind of disgraceful activity to come to this.

Posted by wendy, north carolina on March 30, 2009:

I would haved said no i wont get undressed and you cant make me strip. call my mom because if you dont, you can send me home and i promise she will be right up here. call the cops if you think i have drugs on me.

---

Easy for us to say, as adults. Hard for her to do, when she was 13 and taught to respect her elders. It's a true trap for a young kid, and disgusting. It's why we MUST teach our kids to say "Call my parents" when they're in trouble. -rc

Posted by John in Pocatello on March 30, 2009:

Unfortunately, the current Supreme Court - which could be called "the Bush court" - is even more right wing than the Nixon court, which gave us such winning decisions as the one that allows law enforcement to confiscate property in drug arrests, AND KEEP IT EVEN IF THE DEFENDANT IS ACQUITTED! I have no difficulty picturing this particular court siding with the School District.

Posted by dennis, san francisco on March 30, 2009:

What has "prescription" ibuprofen got to do with anything? It's twice the strength of over-the-counter ibuprofen and even a school principal knows that you can take two pills as easily as one.

This is part of the War on Drugs?

I think the school principal should buy himself a bottle of ibuprofen and wash the whole thing down with a bottle of port.

Posted by Ed, Pittsburgh on March 31, 2009:

If I had strip-searched my 13-year old daughter, CYF, the local child abuse agency, would have come, taken her away, and locked me up in jail. They would have sent case workers to interview family, school officials, my other children, etc. to dig up dirt on me. They would have subjected me to psychological exams. They would have put my daughter in foster care, and garnished my wages to pay for it. But when government (school) does it, that's apparently okay. Government lawyers defend government workers, and the local child abuse agency takes no interest in the case. Where have they been in all of this?

I agree with the person who likened this to rape. All involved should be held personally accountable, including the adminstrative assistant and school nurse (who should have said "no" to the vice principal). Not only should they be sued, but prosecuted and jailed for rape.

---

Why would these agencies have no interest in the case? All I can think is, these agencies are watching out for each other, counting on the mutual support for every action they take. It's not "agencies protect children", it's "us vs. them" -- the agencies in a "war" (as it's often called) against the people they're supposed to be serving. The same is true for the "war on drugs." -rc

Posted by Ralph NY on March 31, 2009:

As a retired teacher I have been against ZT policies for a long time. This case is beyond egregious. Giving the nurse and the administrative assistant a free pass on this brings back the memories of Nazi soldiers saying they were only following orders during the holocaust and Lt. Calley saying the same during the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. At some point to need to think for yourself and determine if what you are told to do is the right thing to do and if it's not, take a stand and stop it from happening.