Answer: C
Explanation: The women wouldn’t be helpful cause she thought she saw a suspect but she didn’t cause she don’t remember. if she doesn’t remember then she would be useful at all
The SCOTUS did not rule that T.L.O’s 4th amendment (searches and seizures) rights had been violated. They ruled that the school administrations search of the bag was reasonable under the circumstances (i.e T.L.O. Being a minor and on school property, meaning that while at school, administration is responsible for the well-being and safety of all students, thus allowing them to search T.L.O’s bag for marijuana). A good way to think of it is that while you’re at school, the administration acts as your parents. Your parents don’t need a warrant to search through your room and neither does the administration if you are on school property. The 4th amendment applies to this case because it protects against unlawful searches and seizures (i.e. searches and seizures that are without a warrant). The constitutional question was whether or not T.L.O. Could be charged with a crime/punished or not because the school administration did not have a warrant. However, because the school administration was acting as a loco parentis (latin term for “in place of the parent”) they did not need a warrant to search her bag. Hope this helped!
The President nominated US Marshals and the senate approved them.
<h2><u><em>Answer:</em></u></h2><h2><u><em>Generally speaking, respecting fellow Americans includes "(iii) Supporting all citizens that voice their opinions, as long as they do not impede on the rights of others," although within certain limits.</em></u></h2><h2><u><em>b</em></u></h2><h2><u><em>Explanation:</em></u></h2><h2><u><em>brainliest</em></u></h2>
