00 apiece (275-277).
The Fourth Amendment says the following:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable [emphasis added] searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized.
The reason that "probable cause" was not mentioned in the list of three things for administrators to be wary of is that young people do not receive the same degree of protection under the law by virtue of their status as students in a public school setting. Essentially, the Supreme Court has reiterated that students possess Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, while at the same time allowing a search that is, in fact, reasonable. The "probable cause" provision is not as much of an issue in the public high school setting.
In a landmark case known as New Jersey v. T.L.O., the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment does apply in school--but not in the same way that it applies everywhere else. School officials don't need "probable cause." They need only show that the search is "reasonable," considering "all the circumstances" involved (Rose 590). They don't even need to suspect a student of committing an actual crime--a suspicion of breaking a school rule can be enough (New Jersey v. T.L.O.)
Teachers and school administrators, therefore, need much less reason to search than the police need. In addition, they can consider "all the circumstances." This presumably means they can consider such things as a student's past record and class behavior. A search that would be considered "unreasonable" for one student, therefore, might be considered "reasonable" for another.
The case referred to as New Jersey v. T.L.O. is the lead case on search and seizure, as decided ...