Talk:New Jersey v. T. L. O.

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article follows the Law Manual of Style. It uses the Bluebook legal referencing style. This citation style uses standardized abbreviations, such as "N.Y. Times" for The New York Times, and has specific typeface formatting requirements. Please review those standards before making style or formatting changes. Information on this referencing style may be obtained at: Cornell's Basic Legal Citation site.

Check

Somebody please check over this page. Especially the case opinions section. --MDonoughe 18:23, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked it and removed the tag. I believe it conforms to Wiki standards. Assawyer 20:30, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Case Opinion section reads oddly. I will try to fix it soon. Papillonderecherche (talk) 16:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

redirects

"new jersey vs t.l.o." doesn't redirect here, while "new jersey v t.l.o." does. The first does return this as a result.71.178.185.177 (talk)

bad words

Could someone please take off the bad words at the top of the page? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.106.1.20 (talk) 18:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.110.10.171 (talk) 21:07, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TLO's name

I noticed in the background section TLO's name is displayed several times, but differently. First should her name be displayed at all? I'm just not sure of this, and it could be perfectly fine. Second, if it is displayed both "Tracy Lois Odem" and "Terry Lee Owens". 75.187.147.92 (talk) 01:06, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Distinguished from Collaborative Efforts

I can't find the "footnote 4" that this section references. Can anyone point me to this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.41.30 (talk) 17:13, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

School Cops

My school cops are considered the school's employees (i am 90% sure of this). They still have cops' uniforms and guns and stuff. can they search us, our lockers or on cars (while on school grounds)? Scott (talk) 03:43, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weird wording?

Choplick then asked TLO into his private office and asked if she would hand over her purse. After TLO was forced to hand over the purse, he observed a pack of cigarettes.

In these two sentences, it is unclear to me whether TLO willingly handed over her purse or it was forcibly confiscated. does it even matter for the sake of the case which one happened? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LiquidSeC (talk • contribs) 17:05, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sources conflict on whether or not T. L. O. gave her purse to Choplick voluntarily. Some say the purse was "grabbed", others say T. L. O. "complied", and the vast majority skip over this detail and go right from "Choplick demanded to see her purse" to "inside the purse, Choplick found...". It does not change the merits of the case because T. L. O. complying with the order would not imply consent to be searched because she wasn't informed of her right to withhold consent. I've just added a footnote explaining all of this. Thank you for pointing this out! — Askarion ✉ 14:36, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]