Colorado Supreme Court considers what constitutional safeguards are necessary during routine student searches.

The Colorado Supreme Court is currently reviewing a case that could set a precedent for how schools across the country implement safety plans involving routine searches of students.

The case involves a student at John F. Kennedy High School, identified only as J.G., who was placed on a safety plan after being adjudicated delinquent for two-gun offenses. The safety plan required daily searches of J.G. without any suspicion of wrongdoing.

The only major area of disagreement during oral arguments on Wednesday was whether J.G. was properly notified of the search protocol under his safety plan. According to J.G.'s lawyer Mark Evans, notice is a crucial part of respecting the constitutional rights of students. He argued that without proper notice, students cannot be expected to understand and comply with the requirements of the safety plan.

J.G.'s case gained national attention when he was arrested for bringing a loaded handgun to school. The school resource officer and an administrator searched his backpack as part of the safety plan, leading to the discovery of the weapon. Some believe that this incident highlights the need for strict safety measures in schools, especially in light of frequent mass shootings.

However, J.G.'s lawyer argued that the lack of notice rendered the search unreasonable. He pointed out that J.G. had attempted to transfer to a different school but ended up back at Kennedy without being informed of the ongoing safety plan. J.G.'s case is challenging the balance between the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and the reduced expectations of privacy for students.

The Colorado School District Self Insurance Pool, which includes 134 school districts, argues that safety plan searches are not intended for criminal investigations, but rather to deter students from bringing weapons to school. They compare these searches to going through airport security. They also highlight the fact that J.G. brought the gun to school believing the search requirement had lapsed.

During the oral arguments, the justices seemed to lean towards the side of the school district. They questioned the lack of evidence of any conversations with J.G. about the safety plan and noted that he had been subjected to the search protocol the previous school year.

Senior Assistant Attorney General Melissa D. Allen also conceded that there was no evidence of any conversations with J.G. However, she argued that the court could still infer that J.G. was aware of the safety plan.

READ MORE:

• LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HAVE ABILITY TO SUE STATE OVER ITS BAD DECISIONS

• COLORADO SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS GOOGLE KEYWORD SEARCH WARRANT

• COLORADO SUPREME COURT REJECTS DECISION LIMITING LAWYER SPEECH

• SHOULD JUVENILES IN COLORADO FOR SEX OFFENSES, BE GIVEN SPECIAL CONSIDERATION

• COLORADO LEGAL EAGLES MAKE STARK PREDICTIONS

The justices also considered the fact that the school had resumed their searches within three days of the new school year, implying that J.G. should have been aware of the ongoing safety plan. This led Justice Melissa Hart to state, "That seems like a really important, different set of facts."

The case, which could set a national precedent for school safety plans, is being closely watched by both sides of the argument.