This is a good time to review the case law on student searches and the Fourth Amendment. While students certainly have a fair amount of 4A protection, it's unfathomable to me to read cases like NJ v. T.L.O. as a meaning the school couldn't search this kid's backpack. THREAD.
You can read TLO here: law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projec…

The short version is that the court upheld the reasonableness of an administrator's search of a student's purse for cigarettes after a teacher reported her for smoking in the bathroom. 2/
The basic premise is that searches must be reasonable at their inception and reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the search in the first place. 3/
There's an enormous distance between that purse search and the borderline strip search over aspirin pills held unconstitutional in Stafford v. Redding, which you can read here: law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projec… 4/
Even there, the court held that the underlying suspicion was enough to search the girl's backpack. The problem was crossing the line into borderline strip search, as the "the content of the suspicion failed to match the degree of intrusion." 5/
Which brings us back to Oxford. A kid looking up ammo and drawing very violent images of shootings with that sort of commentary [the thoughts won't stop, help me] is a serious red flag for a serious threat of violence, far beyond the circumstances in TLO and Stafford. 6/
It would be absolutely bonkers to say the school couldn't inquire as to his access to weapons or conduct a basic search of his backpack to ensure he wasn't an imminent threat to himself or others. High stakes. Reasonable, articulable suspicion of danger. Low on intrusiveness. 7/
Again, we're not talking about arresting a kid for finger guns or strip searching him over aspirin. We are talking very serious indications of violence that directly correlate with what we know of school shooters and persons in crisis. This seems eminently reasonable. 8/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Amy Swearer

Amy Swearer Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AmySwearer

4 Dec
The parents of the Oxford shooter are taking tremendous heat. And rightfully so. But we can't overlook the school's insane non-response, either. This kid drew seriously concerning things about shooting people, and no one thought to check his backpack or ask about gun access?
This wasn't a student pointing finger guns or "acting out." He drew people getting shot and expressed serious mental instability re: serious violence. The FIRST step should have been to ensure he wasn't an imminent threat, then assess general gun access for future threats.
Which is, frankly, also my issue with the parents. I get called into that meeting? I go home and double check the status/security of all lethal means in the home. And any gun is staying on my person or inaccessible until that kid's been in therapy for 6 months, minimum.
Read 4 tweets
26 Nov
A number of people have asked about this shooting in Lubbock, Texas, for which video was just released showing the confrontation from two angles. Here's the tl;dr - there is a pretty strong case for criminal charges against the shooter. THREAD kcbd.com/2021/11/24/att…
In Texas, the use of deadly force is only justified “when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary” to protect against another’s unlawful use of deadly force, or to prevent the imminent commission of specific violent felonies. 1/ ImageImageImageImage
The use of deadly force in defense of property is justified only when immediately necessary to prevent the imminent commission of serious crimes like arson, burglary, or robbery – note, trespassing is not included. You can't shoot or threaten to shoot trespassers without more. 2/
Read 24 tweets
24 Nov
As expected:

- Travis McMichael guilty of malice murder [top charge] and four counts of felony murder, along with several other felonies.

- Greg McMichael guilty of four counts of felony murder, and several other felonies

- Roddie Bryan guilty of three counts of felony murder
I thought Bryan had a reasonable shot with the claim that he didn't know the McMichaels were armed or would shoot anyone. But this general outcome was expected by anyone who actually watched the trial.

Let's break this down a bit: THREAD
This was actual vigilantism. Georgia's [then-existing] citizen's arrest law was horribly written, but obviously did not authorize the armed pursuit of [at worst] a misdemeanor suspect no one actually saw commit said misdemeanor, for the purpose of "questioning" him.
Read 11 tweets
22 Nov
This continues to be the worst hot take on the Rittenhouse acquittal. A thread.
(1) The framing of basic facts here is appalling. This wasn't a peaceful protest. Those ended hours earlier. By the prosecution's own admission, at the very least Rosenbaum - had he lived - would have been prosecuted for his actions that night.
(1)(cont.) Grosskruetz was himself armed with a gun. The whole thing is taking place in front of a minority-owned car lot that's actively being destroyed, during riots that cause $50 million in damages, and begins with Rittenhouse trying to put out an intentionally-set fire.
Read 12 tweets
22 Nov
How are we still playing this game? First, I reject that premise that Rittenhouse "instigated contact" because the video evidence shows him actively running away while being chased, while the contextual evidence is that *no one* should have been there under those circumstances 1/
But let's do this. Right in the thread of dozens of cases is that of Tony Bristol, who killed one unarmed man and nearly killed a second, with a gun he indisputably could not legally possess as a felon but brought his night club security job. clarksvillenow.com/local/verdict-… 2/
Bristol claimed the two men confronted him over an ongoing dispute, he tried to leave, and they engaged him. He claimed he believed they were armed and he reasonably feared imminent danger. 3/
Read 7 tweets
20 Nov
(1) Kizer has not been convicted. She's awaiting trial.

(2) The man she killed was a convicted sex offender for whom I have exactly zero sympathy.

(3) Unlike the Rittenhouse case, there is no video showing what happened.

(4) There is ample evidence she planned his death.
I mean there are text messages that night reasonably inferring she was going to his house specifically to kill him. That's...really damaging to a self-defense claim. It's *still* possible that she did, in that moment, still act in lawful self-defense. But much more complicated.
You can read more below. I want to be very clear - the asshole she killed was a horrible human being who deserved a lifetime of punishment. I have an infinite amount of sympathy for Kizer. She lived through complete hell.

washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/…
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(