RotoGuru Politics Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: Strip-Search Case to SCOTUS

Posted by: walk
- [181472714] Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 10:06

I was not sure where to put this, so I started a new thread. I'll nuke it if it's not worthy of stand-aloneness. I read this article as was somewhat stunned, and then saw about 300 comments. It's a polarizing issue. I also imagine my daughter being subject to this, and ask myself to what extent would I, as a parent, be really mad. I'd be really mad.

Strip-Search of Girl Tests Limit of School Policy
1Mith
      ID: 2894309
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 10:30
Absolutely outrageous that support for such shocking authortarian policies still thrives in the social conservative mindset today.
2bibA
      ID: 512112314
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 10:44
Her assertion should not be misread to infer that she never broke school rules,” the district said of Ms. Redding in a brief, “only that she was never caught.

That quote, to my mind, represents what is so objectionable with many American conservatives.
3walk
      ID: 181472714
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 11:11
bibA. Yes, that quote is so incredibly fukced up, I was stunned to read it. By definition, we are all guilty, we just have not been caught. George Orwell is in the house.
4Boxman
      ID: 3821468
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 12:11
This is truly sickening. If things are so bad that someone feels the need to strip search a minor at a school then either suspend/expel the minor or close the school down until things get under control.

A school administrator should never have this power. Only the police or military. If they thought the kid had drugs stashed in their body, then hold the kid until the police arrive and let them handle it.

I think this person just wanted to cop a feel and this was the alleged "legal" way to do it.
5Frick
      ID: 3410551012
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 12:48
From my reading of the story, a girl was caught with prescription Ibuprofen. She blamed another girl, the girl was strip-searched by two female school employees. She was allowed to keep her bra and panties on, but had to pull them away from her body.

The story does have a very 1984 feel, no evidence other than an accusation by another student.
6bibA
      ID: 512112314
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 12:52
It will be interesting to see if the Supreme Court agrees with us. Can Scalia and Thomas find it within themselves to render in favor of the ACLU?
7Perm Dude
      ID: 25215249
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 12:57
It's a tough call: ACLU or public school teachers? Which one do they hate more?
8Baldwin
      ID: 212502314
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 13:23
"Prescription ibuprofin", good thing it wasn't spitballs. I think that is an automatic expulsion and jail time.
9Perm Dude
      ID: 25215249
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 14:16
That's such a crock as well. "Presciption ibuprofin" is just two regular ibuprofin in one tablet.
10Razor
      ID: 371502414
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 14:41
Was Baldwin serious? I really cannot tell any more. As PD said, prescription ibuprofen is essentially available over the counter if you just up the dosage. Who knows why prescriptions for it even exist. It's a vastly different drug than oxycodone, codeine and more serious drugs that are sometimes taken recreationally.
11Baldwin
      ID: 212502314
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 15:09
The politically correct weapon-free, drug-free zero tolerance zones are a crock.

They don't call it preparatory school for nothin.

It's a brave new world.
12Tree
      ID: 61411921
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 17:58
the is all the work of the globalists. did you people not read NewPlanStripSearch2000 from the UN???
13Boxman
      ID: 571114225
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 18:17
Does anyone else know what Tree is getting at in #12?
14Myboyjack
      Dude
      ID: 014826271
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 19:59
Absolutely outrageous that support for such shocking authortarian policies still thrives in the social conservative mindset today.

Where are y'all getting the "consevatives support overly intrusive public school actions" meme? THe people that establish school policies (and hire the lawyers that defend them) in California are decidely not conservative.
15Mith
      Dude
      ID: 01629107
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 20:12
How was this Arizona school's no-tolerance policy established from CA?
16Myboyjack
      Dude
      ID: 014826271
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 20:53
Strike CA replace with AZ - how did you determine that AZ school policy makers are "conservatives". I assume you have some facts I'm not aware of, I was hoping you'd share. In my expeience, it's conservatives that are most offended by creeping intrusiveness of public schools into privacy zones - and its liberals who deride them as paranoid when they take offense. You know that AZ is different?

17Perm Dude
      ID: 72302414
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 21:01
Well, Arizona is a *lot* more conservative than CA.

Presumably you threw out the California reference to demonstrate that liberal states would not have conservative school officials.
18Myboyjack
      Dude
      ID: 014826271
      Tue, Mar 24, 2009, 21:15
I just skimmed ther article, saw it was a 9th circuit decision and assumed Cali, actually. My mistake - my real question was how MITH, and the posters following were able to discern that strip searching by public school officials was by product or was endorsed by a conservative mind set.
19Mith
      ID: 2894309
      Wed, Mar 25, 2009, 12:40
MBJ
To be clear, I'm referring to social conservatives - many of whom surely otherwise align themselves with the political left and vote Democrat. Far more often than not, when I hear about these authoritaruan zero-tolerance policies, they are in places which tend socially conservative.

But more to the point, I associate the greater drug war (and it's authoritarianism run amok) with American social conservatism. It's always been promoted and expanded most effectively by appealing to social conservatives. I can't think of any political candidates for any level of office who sought to bolster their socially liberal credentials by promoting excessive authoritarian anti-controlled substance measures. Can you?
20Perm Dude
      ID: 154552311
      Fri, Jun 26, 2009, 00:53
SCOTUS rules that strip search was unconstitutional
21Seattle Zen
      ID: 65562615
      Fri, Jun 26, 2009, 16:58
Oh, it's rare, but once every blue moon Antonin Scalia gets one right:

Crime laboratory reports may not be used against criminal defendants at trial unless the analysts responsible for creating them give testimony and subject themselves to cross-examination
The two sides differed sharply about the practical consequences of requiring testimony from crime laboratory analysts. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the four dissenters, said Philadelphia’s 18 drug analysts will now each be required to testify in more than 69 trials next year, and Cleveland’s six drug analysts in 117 trials each.

Noting that 500 employees of the Federal Bureau of Investigation laboratory in Quantico, Va., conduct more than a million scientific tests each year, Justice Kennedy wrote, “The court’s decision means that before any of those million tests reaches a jury, at least one of the laboratory’s analysts must board a plane, find his or her way to an unfamiliar courthouse and sit there waiting to read aloud notes made months ago.”

Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, scoffed at those “back-of-the-envelope calculations.”

In any event, he added, the court is not entitled to ignore even an unwise constitutional command for reasons of convenience.

“The confrontation clause may make the prosecution of criminals more burdensome, but that is equally true of the right to trial by jury and the privilege against self-incrimination,” Justice Scalia wrote.

“The sky will not fall after today’s decision,” he added.

Here, here! In light of what was revealed here in WA last year - more than one lab tech would sign off on test of simulator solutions for Breathalyzer machines when in fact they did not test them at all, Scalia is right, lets us cross examine those liars!
22Boldwin
      ID: 25282121
      Fri, Jun 26, 2009, 18:34
Yup, I regularly get wind of highly respected crime labs being unexceptably helpful to the prosecution.
23Seattle Zen
      ID: 37243012
      Sun, Aug 30, 2009, 13:24
Turning this into the SCOTUS thread: SCOTUS to rehear oral arguments in Hillary, the Movie case.
The Supreme Court will cut short its summer break in early September to hear a new argument in a momentous case that could transform the way political campaigns are conducted. The case, which arises from a minor political documentary called “Hillary: The Movie,” seemed an oddity when it was first argued in March. Just six months later, it has turned into a juggernaut with the potential to shatter a century-long understanding about the government’s ability to bar corporations from spending money to support political candidates. The case has also deepened a profound split among liberals, dividing those who view government regulation of political speech as an affront to the First Amendment from those who believe that unlimited corporate campaign spending is a threat to democracy.

This is a rare instance where I disagree with the ACLU, I believe that this movie is absolutely campaign spending and needs to follow the rules. Could be a monumental decision.
24Khahan
      ID: 54138190
      Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 19:22
Wasn't sure where to put this, but considering SZ's post 23, this post seems even more appropriate.

Citizens United explanation given. Alito gives a rather compelling argument in favor of the Citizen's United ruling. Doesn't make me like it anymore. Doesn't make me think its a good thing or sway me that they should have. But I do understand their reasoning now, at least.
25sarge33rd
      ID: 12554167
      Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 19:36
nice find Khahan. I too dislike the decision hugely, but Alito makes a valid point when he asks why should media corporations be allowed to speak, and not another corporate entity? That lone question, makes opposition difficult.
26Seattle Zen
      ID: 3603123
      Sun, Nov 18, 2012, 12:37
Could be a monumental decision.

Whoa, sure was...
27sarge33rd
      ID: 12554167
      Sun, Nov 18, 2012, 12:55
indeed it was. Good call Zen.
 If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com 
RotoGuru Politics Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: Strip-Search Case to SCOTUS

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Click here to insert a block of hidden (spoiler) text
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours11
Last 7 days22
Last 30 days1917
Since Mar 1, 20071747915