View source for New Jersey v. T. L. O.

{{Use American English|date=September 2025}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=September 2023}}
{{Infobox SCOTUS case
| Litigants = New Jersey v. T. L. O.
| ArgueDate = March 28
| ArgueYear = 1984
| ReargueDate = October 2
| ReargueYear = 1984
| DecideDate = January 15
| DecideYear = 1985
| FullName = State of New Jersey v. T. L. O.
| ParallelCitations = 105 S. Ct. 733; 83 [[L. Ed. 2d]] 720; 1985 [[U.S. LEXIS]] 41; 53 U.S.L.W. 4083
| USVol = 469
| USPage = 325
| OralArgument = https://apps.oyez.org/player/#/burger8/oral_argument_audio/18116
| OralReargument = https://apps.oyez.org/player/#/burger8/oral_argument_audio/23720
| Opinion = http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep469/usrep469325/usrep469325.pdf
| Prior = Defendant convicted sub. nom. ''State ex rel. T. L. O.'' 178 [[New Jersey Superior Court|N.J. Super.]] 329, 428 [[A.2d]] 1327 (Middlesex County Ct., 1980); Affirmed, 185 N.J. Super. 279, 448 A.2d 493 ([[New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division|App. Div.]], 1982); conviction reversed 94 [[New Jersey Supreme Court|N.J.]] 331, 463 A.2d 934 (1983); [[Certiorari|cert]]. granted, {{ussc|464|991|1983|el=no}}.
| Subsequent = 
| Holding = The Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures only partially applies to searches conducted by public school officials (administrators), and the search of T. L. O.'s purse was reasonable.
| Majority = White
| JoinMajority = Burger, Powell, Rehnquist, O'Connor
| Concurrence = Powell
| JoinConcurrence = O'Connor
| Concurrence2 = Blackmun
| Concurrence/Dissent = Brennan
| JoinConcurrence/Dissent = Marshall
| Concurrence/Dissent2 = Stevens
| JoinConcurrence/Dissent2 = Marshall; Brennan (Part I)
| LawsApplied = [[Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution|U.S. Const. amend IV]]
}}
'''''New Jersey v. T. L. O.''''',{{Refn|Sometimes written as '''''New Jersey v. T.L.O.'''''|group=fn}} 469 U.S. 325 (1985), is a [[List of landmark court decisions in the United States|landmark decision]] by the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] which established the standards by which a public school official can search a student in a school environment without a [[search warrant]], and to what extent.

The case centered around a student at [[Piscataway High School]] in [[Middlesex County, New Jersey]], known then only by her initials T. L. O.,{{refn|1=Because T. L. O. was a minor when the lawsuit was filed, her initials were used during litigation to protect her privacy. Her name was later revealed to be Terry Lee Owens.<ref>{{Bluebook journal|last=Stewart|year=1986|first=David O.|title=And in Her Purse the Principal Found Marijuana|volume=71|journal=[[ABA Journal|ABA J.]]|page=51}}</ref>|group=fn}} who was searched for [[contraband]] after she was caught smoking in a school bathroom. She was sent to the principal's office, where the assistant vice principal searched her purse and found [[Cannabis (drug)|marijuana]], [[drug paraphernalia]], and documentation of drug sales. She was suspended from the school and charged by police for the paraphernalia found in the search, but fought the charges on the basis that the search of her purse violated the [[Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourth Amendment]]'s prohibition against unreasonable [[search and seizure]].

The [[New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division|New Jersey Superior Court]] affirmed the constitutionality of the search, but the [[Supreme Court of New Jersey]] reversed, holding that the search of her purse was unreasonable. On appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court held that the Fourth Amendment applies to searches conducted by school officials in a school setting. However, school officials do not need to have [[probable cause]] nor obtain a warrant before searching a student. Instead, in order for a search to be justified, school officials must have "[[reasonable suspicion]]" that the student has violated either the law or school rules. In a 6–3 decision delivered by Justice [[Byron White]], the Court ruled that the school's search of T. L. O.'s purse was constitutional, setting a new precedent for school searches and student privacy.

==Background==

=== Prior case law ===
The [[Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourth Amendment]] to the [[Constitution of the United States|United States Constitution]] prohibits unreasonable [[Search and seizure|searches and seizures]] by the federal government, which is enforceable against state governments and their agents through the [[Due Process Clause]] of the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]].<ref>{{Bluebook journal|last=Zane|first=Dale Edward|year=1987|url=https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3305&context=clr|title=School Searches Under the Fourth Amendment: New Jersey v. T.L.O.|volume=72|journal=[[Cornell Law Review|Cornell L. Rev.]]|page=368|pin=368–369}}</ref>

=== Facts of the case ===
On March 7, 1980, a teacher at [[Piscataway High School]] in [[Piscataway, New Jersey]] discovered two 14-year-old freshmen smoking in the girls' bathroom in violation of school rules.<ref>Zane, at 380.</ref>{{refn|While students at Piscataway High School were allowed to smoke in designated smoking areas, the bathroom was not one of them.<ref>{{smallcaps|Justin Driver}}, [https://www.worldcat.org/title/1050871979 {{smallcaps|The Schoolhouse Gate: Public Education, the Supreme Court, and the Battle for the American Mind}}] 188 (2019).</ref>|group=fn}} The teacher brought the two to the principal's office, where they were questioned by assistant [[Vice-principal|vice principal]] Theodore Choplick.<ref>Zane, at 380.</ref> One of the students admitted to smoking and was assigned to complete a three-day smoking clinic before being sent back to class,<ref name=":0">''State in Interest of T. L. O.'', 463 [[A.2d]] [https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2372587/state-in-interest-of-tlo/ 934] ([[Supreme Court of New Jersey|N.J.]] 1983) (hereinafter cited as ''State in Interest of T. L. O. 1983'').</ref> but the other student, whose initials were T. L. O., denied that she was smoking in the bathroom and said that she "did not smoke at all".<ref>''New Jersey v. T. L. O.'', at 328.</ref>

Choplick brought T. L. O. into his private office and demanded to see her purse.<ref>''New Jersey v. T. L. O.'', at 328.</ref>{{refn|Sources conflict on whether T. L. O. voluntarily gave her purse to Choplick or whether Choplick seized it himself. Regardless, T. L. O. complying with Choplick's demand would not imply consent to be searched because T. L. O. was not informed of her right to withhold consent.<ref>''State in Interest of T. L. O. 1980'', at 335-336.</ref>|group=fn}} Upon opening it, Choplick found a pack of [[Marlboro]] cigarettes and [[rolling paper]] on top of the purse, which he associated with [[Cannabis (drug)|marijuana]] use.<ref>{{Smallcaps|Driver}}, at 188.</ref> Believing a more thorough search "might yield further evidence of drug use", Choplick searched the rest of the purse, revealing a small amount of [[Cannabis (drug)|marijuana]], a [[tobacco pipe]], several empty plastic bags, an index card with the names of students who owed her money, and two letters implicating her in dealing marijuana.<ref>''New Jersey v. T. L. O.'', at 328.</ref> Choplick called T. L. O.'s mother and turned over the evidence found in T. L. O.'s purse to police. At the request of police, T. L. O.'s mother brought her to the police station for questioning, where T. L. O. admitted to selling marijuana at the school.<ref>''New Jersey v. T. L. O.'', at 328-329.</ref> T. L. O. elaborated that she had sold "approximately 18 to 20 marijuana cigarettes for a price of one dollar each" earlier that day.<ref>''State in Interest of T. L. O.'', 428 [[A.2d]] [https://web.archive.org/web/20230621143736/https://casetext.com/case/state-in-interest-of-tlo 1327] ([[New Jersey Superior Court|N.J. Super.]] 1980) (hereinafter cited as ''State in Interest of T. L. O. 1980)''.</ref>

T. L. O. received a three-day suspension from the school for smoking in a non-smoking area and an additional seven-day suspension for possessing marijuana on school property.<ref>{{Smallcaps|Driver}}, at 189.</ref> The state brought [[Juvenile delinquency in the United States|delinquency]] charges against T. L. O. for the drugs and [[Drug paraphernalia|paraphernalia]] found in her purse.<ref>{{Bluebook journal|last=Lavoie|first=Jane M.|year=1985|url=https://openyls.law.yale.edu/bitstream/handle/20.500.13051/17315/11_4YaleL_PolyRev141_1985_1986_.pdf?sequence=2|title=New Jersey v. T.L.O.: Misapplication of an Appropriate Standard|volume=141|journal=[[Yale Law & Policy Review|Yale L. & Pol'y Rev.]]|page=141|pin=142}}</ref>

=== Lower court proceedings ===
T. L. O. was tried in the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of [[Middlesex County, New Jersey]].<ref>Lavoie, at 142.</ref> T. L. O. filed a [[Suppression of evidence|motion to suppress]] the evidence found in her purse, arguing that the search of her purse violated the [[Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourth Amendment]] and that the evidence found as a result of it should be [[Exclusionary rule|excluded]] from trial.<ref>Zane, at 381.</ref> The Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court denied the motion, finding that, while the Fourth Amendment does apply to searches by school officials, a school official is permitted to search a student's belongings if there is "[[reasonable suspicion]]" that the student broke the law or school policy.<ref>''New Jersey v. T. L. O.'', at 329.</ref> The court found that the search of T. L. O.'s purse was acceptable because Choplick "had reasonable cause to believe that smoking, a violation of school policy, had occurred".<ref>''State in Interest of T. L. O. 1983'', at 337-338.</ref> T. L. O. was found to be delinquent and was sentenced to one year of [[probation]] on January 8, 1982.<ref>''New Jersey v. T. L. O.'', at 330.</ref>

T. L. O. appealed the Juvenile Court's decision to the [[New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division|Appellate Division]] of the [[New Jersey Superior Court]], which also found no violation of the Fourth Amendment.<ref>''New Jersey v. T. L. O.'', at 330.</ref> T. L. O. then appealed to the [[Supreme Court of New Jersey]], which reversed the Superior Court's decision, finding that Choplick did not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion to search T. L. O.'s purse.<ref>{{Bluebook journal|last=Griffith III|first=Frederick J.|year=1988|title=New Jersey v. T.L.O. and Its Progeny: The Bill of Rights at School|page=617|pin=619|volume=5|journal=Cooley L. Rev.}}</ref> The Supreme Court of New Jersey remanded the case and ordered the evidence found in T. L. O.'s purse to be suppressed.<ref>''State in Interest of T. L. O. 1983'', at 350.</ref> The state appealed the decision to the [[Supreme Court of the United States]], which granted ''[[certiorari]]'' on November 29, 1983.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1983/11/29/nyregion/high-court-to-hear-case-on-jersey-casino-union.html High Court to Hear Case on Jersey Casino Unions], {{Smallcaps|N.Y. Times}}, November 29, 1983.</ref>

==Opinion of the Court==
Oral arguments were initially heard on March 28, 1984. A rehearing was ordered by the Court and the case was reargued on October 2, 1984. The [[Supreme Court of the United States]], in a 6–3 decision issued by Justice [[Byron White]], balancing between the legitimate [[expectation of privacy]] of the individual, even a child, and the school's interest in maintaining order and discipline, held for the appellant (the state).<ref>Linda Greenhouse, [https://www.nytimes.com/1985/01/16/us/high-court-eases-search-strictures-in-public-schools.html High Court Eases Search Strictures in Public Schools], {{Smallcaps|N.Y. Times}}, January 16, 1985.</ref> According to school officials, they do require a "[[reasonable suspicion]]" to perform a search.

Her possession of any cigarettes was relevant to whether or not she was being truthful, and since she had been caught in the bathroom and taken directly to the office, it was reasonable to assume she had the cigarettes in her purse. Thus, the vice-principal had reasonable cause to suspect a school rule had been broken, and more than just a "hunch" to search the purse. When the vice-principal was searching for the cigarettes, the drug-related evidence was in plain view. The [[plain view doctrine]] is an exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment. Thus, the reasonable search for cigarettes led to some of the drug related material being discovered, which justified a search (including the zippered compartments inside the bag) resulting in the discovery of the cigarettes and other evidence including a small bag of marijuana and cigarette rolling papers.

=== Other opinions ===
In a separate concurring opinion, Justice [[Lewis F. Powell Jr.]] (joined by Justice [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]) stated that while he agreed with the Court's opinion, he felt that students in primary and secondary educational settings should not be afforded the same level of protection for search and seizures as adults and juveniles in non-school settings.<ref>''T. L. O.'', 469 U.S. at 348–50 (Powell, J., concurring).</ref>

Justice [[William J. Brennan Jr.|William J. Brennan]], joined by Justice [[Thurgood Marshall]], agreed with the majority's conclusions about the applicability of the Fourth Amendment to school teachers but dissented from the new standard set down by the Court, which he felt was a departure from the traditional "[[probable cause]]" approach.

{{Blockquote
|text=Today's decision sanctions school officials to conduct full scale searches on a 'reasonableness' standard whose only definite content is that it is not the same test as the 'probable cause' standard found in the text of the Fourth Amendment. In adopting this unclear, unprecedented, and unnecessary departure from generally Fourth Amendment standards, the Court carves out a broad exception to standards that this Court has developed over years of considering Fourth Amendment problems. Its decision is supported neither by precedent nor even by a fair application of the 'Balancing test of power' it proclaims in this very opinion.<ref>''T. L. O.'', 469 U.S. at 354 (Brennan, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).</ref>
}}

Brennan went on to argue that for the government to justify a [[Warrantless searches in the United States|warrantless search]], some "special governmental interest" outside of standard law enforcement interests was required. This idea was later adopted by the Court as the [[special needs exception]].<ref>{{Bluebook journal|last=Arcila|first=Fabio|year=2004|url=https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1239&context=scholarlyworks|title=Special Needs and Special Deference: Suspicionless Civil Searches in the Modern Regulatory State|volume=56|journal=Admin. L. Rev.|page=1223}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 469]]
* ''[[Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton]]'' (1995)
* ''[[Board of Education v. Earls]]'' (2002)
* ''[[Safford Unified School District v. Redding]]'' (2009)
* [[Special needs exception]]
* ''[[Terry v. Ohio]]'' (1968)

==Footnotes==
{{reflist|group=fn}}

==References==

; References
{{reflist}}

; Sources
* ''New Jersey v. T. L. O.'', [https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep469/usrep469325/usrep469325.pdf 469 U.S. 325] (1985)

==External links==
* {{caselaw source
 | case=''New Jersey v. T. L. O.'', {{ussc|469|325|1985|el=no}}
 | courtlistener =https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/111301/new-jersey-v-tlo/
 | findlaw=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/469/325.html
 | googlescholar = https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4170966027434691269
 | justia=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/469/325/
 | loc =http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep469/usrep469325/usrep469325.pdf
 | oyez =https://www.oyez.org/cases/1983/83-712
 | other_source1 = California State University, Stanislaus
 | other_url1 =https://www.csustan.edu/sites/default/files/CJ/JJustice/CaseFiles/NEW%20JERSEY-v-TLO.pdf
}}
* [https://www.landmarkcases.org/cases/new-jersey-v-tlo Summary on LandmarkCases.org]

{{StudentsConstitutionalRights}}
{{US4thAmendment|warrantexceptions}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:New Jersey v. T. L. O.}}
[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court]]
[[Category:United States Fourth Amendment case law]]
[[Category:Student rights case law in the United States]]
[[Category:United States children's rights case law]]
[[Category:United States controlled substances case law]]
[[Category:1985 in United States case law]]
[[Category:1985 in education]]
[[Category:Piscataway, New Jersey]]
[[Category:Cannabis in New Jersey]]
[[Category:Education in Middlesex County, New Jersey]]
[[Category:Smoking in the United States]]