The United States Supreme Court has recognized that the school setting requires some modification of the level of illegal activity required to justify a search of a student or the student’s property (purse, backpack, locker, phone, etc.).

The Court has held that there are two general requirements for a school administrator to search a student or the student’s property: (1) the school administrator must have reasonable suspicion (a lower standard than probable cause) that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating the law or the rules of the school; and (2) the scope of the search must be reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not be excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the suspected infraction. See Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding, 557 U.S. 364 (2009); New Jersey v. TLO, 469 U.S. 325 (1985).

For example, there must be a reasonable suspicion of danger or that the student has hidden contraband such as drugs in the student’s underwear to extend the scope of a school search from outer clothes, backpacks, and purses, for example, to underwear and the likely exposure of private body parts.

This standard is designed to allow school authorities to maintain order in their schools without unduly burdening those efforts and without authorizing unrestrained intrusions on the privacy of schoolchildren.

In Kansas, as in other states, the regulation of student searches by school administrators is guided by the precedents set by the United States Supreme Court. Specifically, two key cases, Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding and New Jersey v. TLO, establish the standards for when and how school officials can search students or their property. First, the school administrator must have reasonable suspicion, which is a less stringent standard than probable cause, that the student is violating either the law or school rules. Second, the search must be proportionate to the suspected infraction and not excessively intrusive, considering the student's age, gender, and the nature of the suspected violation. For instance, a more invasive search, such as into a student's underwear, would require a reasonable suspicion of a serious danger or that contraband is concealed in a manner that less intrusive searches would not reveal. These standards aim to balance the need for school safety and discipline with the protection of students' privacy rights.