Riley Says Get a Warrant — So Why Are Schools Skipping That Step?
A federal appeals court ruled that a Virginia Beach assistant principal did not violate a 13-year-old's Fourth Amendment rights by searching the student's phone without a warrant, even though the search occurred in front of school police and led to criminal charges. The decision sits in tension with the Supreme Court's Riley ruling, which generally requires warrants for cellphone searches.
Why this matters: Riley v. California was decided in 2014. The Supreme Court was unanimous: phones are not pockets, they are lives, and police need a warrant to search them. What the Fourth Circuit is allowing here is a workaround. Put a school administrator in front, keep the cop nearby, and suddenly the warrant requirement dissolves. The person whose rights get stripped is a 13-year-old who then gets criminally charged. That is not a school discipline situation. That is a prosecution that started without the constitutional protection the Supreme Court said people deserve.
Who should care: Privacy officers · Cybersecurity
This summary is AI-assisted and may contain errors. It is an original briefing to help you gauge significance quickly — not a reproduction of the source. Always read the linked original before relying on it. See our methodology.