Laws on student rights and campus police

Right to protection from unwarranted search and seizure Students are protected from unwarranted search and seizure.[36][119] The fourth and fourteenth amendments protect from search and seizure without a warrant. They enshrine the individuals right to be “secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects.” Warrants must include person, place and specific items eligible for search and or seizure. Search and seizure rights do not apply to automobiles. Right to arrest by official police officers Individuals are protected from arrest by undeputized campus police[35][146] and illegal search and seizure if arrest is made. Right to protection from entrapment Students are protected from entrapment by campus police as individuals are protected outside the educational environment.[47][147] Right to protection from dorm search and seizure Piazzola v. Watkins (1971),[148] established that students are not required to waive search and seizure rights as a condition of dormitory residence.[107] Random door sweeps are impermissible.[149] Right to clearly defined terms of dorm search and seizure Institutions may enter rooms in times of emergency, if they have proof of illegal activity or a threat to the educational environment.[110][111] Both these terms must be clearly stipulated in advance. Otherwise institutions must as for permission to enter.[36][112][113] When dorms rooms are legally searched for narrowly defined reasons or officials are legally permitted to enter student rooms, students are not protected from property damage incurred in the search process[47][114] or action taken when evidence is in plain sight.[47][115] Right to protection from illegal police search and seizure Evidence found in student dorm rooms by institutional employees cannot be used in a court of law and institutions cannot allow police to conduct a search and seizure with out warrant.[110][117][118] Students may not be punished for refusing a warrantless search from institutional authorities or police officers.[47][119] When students freely allow institutional officials to enter institutions can hold students accountable for evidence in plain sight. A number of state courts have also found that institutions have a responsibility o prevent or make efforts to limit injury on campus from dangerous property and criminal conditions[36][150][151][152] so long as injury is both foreseeable and preventable. Right to protection from injury in facilities under campus jurisdiction Knoll v. Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska (1999)[153] found that institutions are responsible for ensuring the safety of facilities which are either under institutional jurisdiction or oversight. Institutions are, thus, responsible for institutionally owned dormitories and fraternities whether on campus or off campus and also for fraternities which may not be owned by the institution but are regulated by the institution. By taking on a regulatory role the institution also takes on this liability. Another state court found, that when students are not lawfully permitted to be on institutional property or in institutional buildings after hours, for instance, the institution is not responsible.[35][154] Where institutions willfully take responsibility for something like a fraternity or require students to abide by their rules they also take on the liability. Right to protection from foreseeable crime on campus Students should be safe from for seeable crime especially in light of past reports of crime, if loitering or dangerous conditions have been made etc.[151][152] Institutions are required to take safety precautions including the monitoring of unauthorized personnel in dormitories, taking action against unauthorized personnel when they pose a threat to safety and ensuring adequate security measures are in place. Right to protection from injury caused by other students Students deserve protection from other students over whom the institution has oversight including voluntarily assumed jurisdiction eg: clubs, sororities, fraternities, teams.[151][155] This, for instance, includes protection from foreseeable or preventable fraternity hazing even if fraternities are not located on institutional property. The institution also has a responsibility to inform itself of safety risks existent in institutionally regulated programs (White, 2007). State courts have found that institutions are not responsible, however, for screening ex-convicts before admission

Menu