Girl's strip search argued in court WASHINGTON In Supreme Court arguments Tuesday over the strip search of a 13-year-old for prescription-strength ibuprofen, more justices voiced sympathy for the school administrators looking for possible drugs than for the girl who had to take off her clothes. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washin...urt-strip-search_N.htm?csp=24&RM_Exclude=Juno ...... Re video: Interesting question put to Savana Redding by a reporter, went along the lines of... "You know there are a bunch of old guys up there (did I hear that right? LOL) and all but one of them are men. So what do you think they did not understand etc..." Seemed at first like an attempt to get Savana riled up (though Savana's practical reply suggested she didn't 'get' the male dominant aspect) but after reading the article, can see why the reporter asked the question. imo While I agree drugs are a serious problem, Justice Stephen Breyer's dismissive attitude re strip searches of children also presents a serious problem. His job is to determine if the strip search of this child, as it occurred to this child, was unreasonable/reasonable under the 4th Amendment. So I can only hope that senility, rather than constitutional interpretation, is the reason behind his bizarre remarks while court was in session: "Justice Stephen Breyer said that middle-schoolers often hid things in their underwear, but then he protested amid laughter "Not my underwear...... Breyer also questioned the degree of the privacy intrusion. "I'm trying to work out why is this a major thing to say, 'Strip down to your underclothes,' " he said, "which children do when they change for gym." I hope he is able to work out why it is a major thing that he be able to differentiate between a child being strip searched and a child changing into gym clothes. In the days of Kings and castles...Court Fools amused by ludicrous actions and utterances.