In the January issue, we wrote about students’ experiences with searches here at Boulder High School, and how these relate to BVSD policy and the law. Since then, The Owl has had more students come forward who were interested in giving us interviews, and we have looked into more resources and documents on school searches. With this new information, we are following up with a second part, and hope that we can now paint a fuller picture of what’s going on with searches at BHS.
After the publication of our last article, Dr. Morales sent an email to school faculty concerning the matter. In it, she stated that “…searches will be conducted respectfully, ensuring the privacy and dignity of the students involved.” However, the students we interviewed did not believe that they were searched respectfully and with dignity.
Mesa Ridgik, ‘24, said her search felt like a “violation,” and was “invasive.” Adah Ellis-Risler, ‘24, told us about how she and others were taken out of the bathroom to be searched. Ellis-Risler told us that when she and the other students voiced confusion or protest at what was going on, Vice Principal Baxter, told them that she “is used to dealing with first graders.” We were unable to inquire further with the administration on this or on general policies for maintaining respectful searches. Finally, Kenny Jahn, ‘24, explained how when he was brought into the office for a search, the staff member administering the search took his bag and “dumped” its contents haphazardly onto a table. In our interviews, many students said the administration could treat students with more dignity and respect by making it clearer what the student is being searched for, or what the specific accusation against them is.
When Chloe Webster, ‘24, was searched, she and the other students were forced to accompany a CSO in groups to retrieve their backpacks from their classes to be searched. Mesa Ridgik is another student who was forced to get her backpack. After waiting an hour in the office for an admin meeting to end, she had her backpack searched extremely thoroughly, with books and folders all being searched. The search was so thorough, in fact, that Ridgik’s sealed individual tampons were opened, and her vitamin water seized and not returned. Ridgik reported that those searching her did not ask her name until the search was concluded. The entire experience distressed Mesa so much that she had to leave school—a note added to Infinite Campus regarding her absence explained that she was excused for “tears from the vape investigation,” tears likely caused by the unreasonableness of the search.
Kenny Jahn’s experiences with searches also seem notable. Kenny says he has been searched about 5 or 6 times, though he has never been found to possess any prohibited items. Last school year, Kenny reported that for three or four weeks, he was being pulled out of class to be searched every Thursday during second period. During one search, his Beats headphones were seized from his bag, and according to Kenny, he was not given a reason as to why they were taken. These headphones have yet to be returned, making it unclear how this differs from theft.
After the publication of our first article, we received feedback from staff and the administration that highlighted the need to gain perspectives that included more than just those of students,so we scheduled a meeting to get an administrative perspective. We first contacted the administration on Friday, February 2nd, a month before writing this article, and scheduled an interview with the entire administrative team for the following Tuesday; however, when that Tuesday came, they were not present for the meeting. We, again, requested statements or comments from the administration, either by meeting or through email. We never received a response to our questions and were told that the administration was not free to meet with us until the common lunch right before Spring Break.
To broaden the scope of perspectives, we spoke with Lisa Cass, Mesa Rigdik’s mother. Cass reported that when Mesa got home on the day of the search, the school called her, but she did not answer the call because both she and her daughter were too distressed about what had been a traumatic search. Cass did call back later in the day requesting a follow-up conversation with the administration but never received a call back. In fact, she never received any response from the administration. Cass also noted that “There has been no communication with parents at all,” and followed by highlighting that until parents, students, and staff alike are aware of an issue “nothing will change.”
Cass also voiced concerns about students being afraid to use the bathroom at school. This concern was echoed by Chloe Webster, who told us that she and another student who was being searched talked about avoiding being in the bathroom in the future, suggesting that a fear of being searched may be discouraging students from using the restroom.
There is also the issue that students are not being informed about the reasons for the search. Adah Ellis-Risler had to ask administrators multiple times before she was given the reason she was being searched, and the other students we spoke to reported that they were never given a reason for the search.
According to New Jersey vs. T.L.O. (1985) which established the reasonableness standard for school searches, “A search will be permissible in its scope when the measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not excessively intrusive in light of the student’s age and sex and the nature of the infraction” Our last article pointed out that a reasonable search should be conducted within a reasonable scope. This means that the extent to which a student or their belongings are searched should be consistent with the accusation against them. In our interviews for this article, information has been presented that makes the scope of the school’s searches certainly seem questionable.
Searching students’ backpacks in a classroom, seizing items like headphones without explanation, or opening tampons goes beyond what T.L.O. established as “reasonable,” as the justification for most of these searches seems to be the supposition that substances were being used in the bathroom, as Webster realized after being asked if she had been given prohibited substances.
Also, looking at Policy JDDA-R, the person performing the search is to “Conduct an informal meeting with the student explaining the allegation in a language the student can understand, and ensure the student is allowed to respond to the allegations.”
Student interviews certainly seem to suggest that the allegations against them are not being made sufficiently clear and that they are not being given an opportunity to respond to the allegation against them. The students we spoke to were not being told exactly why they were being searched, or had to ask multiple times to even have an idea, and searches often continued without a student being able to respond to any allegations. This lack of openness with students coupled with the inability to properly consent to the search (as reported) and minimal transparency with parents highlights why students would feel highly uncomfortable in these experiences.
Thus far, the administration has not outwardly expressed interest in listening to students’ concerns about the way these searches are being conducted. If this isn’t the case, and the administration values a healthy student in-school experience, then the first thing they can do is follow BVSD and legal policies and procedures. They can ensure searches are conducted with reasonable scope, be open with students during searches, and be transparent with parents. We encourage the administration to address the student concerns laid out above. The Owl would be happy to publish a public response.
