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 New Hampshire, as in the rest of the United States, the Supreme Court has established that school administrators can search a student or their property under less stringent conditions than law enforcement officers. Specifically, two requirements must be met for a search to be considered reasonable in a school setting. First, the administrator must have reasonable suspicion that the search will reveal evidence of a law or school rule violation. This is a lower standard than the probable cause required for searches outside of school. Second, the search must be proportionate to the suspected infraction and not excessively intrusive, taking into account the student's age, gender, and the nature of the suspected violation. The landmark cases that set these standards are Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding and New Jersey v. TLO. In practice, this means that a search in a school may not extend to very private areas such as a student's underwear unless there is a reasonable suspicion of a serious danger or that contraband is hidden in such a manner that would justify a more invasive search.