Sixth Circuit Court: Search and Seizure of School Employee Deemed Constitutional

A recent unpublished Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision highlights the Fourth Amendment rights regarding searches and seizures of school employees. Lawson v Creely, Docket No. 24-5649 (CA 6, March 26, 2025). Holly Lawson, a guidance counselor, sued her former school board and school officials, alleging that school employees violated her constitutional rights when they searched her bag and subsequently detained and questioned her.

Background

Lawson alleged that her Fourth Amendment rights were violated on two separate occasions: (1) when her bag was searched by coworkers Kayla Creely and Lori Franke, and (2) when, the following day, the school superintendent detained Lawson in a school office and asked Lawson to search her own bag in the presence of law enforcement officers.

Creely and Franke worked in the same office as Lawson and were concerned about her behavior and possible drug use. Acting on their suspicions, the two employees looked in Lawson’s bag after she stepped out of the office. They found a pistol in her bag next to a bottle of pills. The employees later notified the superintendent, who contacted law enforcement to address the issue. The next day, Lawson returned to the school with her bag and was met by the superintendent. The superintendent asked Lawson if they could talk about an issue in a nearby office, where two law enforcement officers were waiting to assist. When the superintendent asked Lawson if she had a firearm in the bag, she voluntarily checked her bag and admitted that it was “in there in the bottom” of the bag.

Court Analysis

The Sixth Circuit determined that Creely and Franke, when they searched Lawson's bag, did not possess authority to search and therefore did not act "under color of state law," a vital element for a successful Fourth Amendment claim. 

The court’s finding was supported by the fact that relevant board policy and employee handbooks did not authorize the employees to conduct searches or investigate. Rather, board policy specifically directed such employees to report suspicious activity to the building principal to conduct searches. Based on this analysis, the Sixth Circuit found that the employees, as private actors, did not violate Lawson’s Fourth Amendment rights.

The court found that the superintendent “detained” Lawson when he met her in the school lobby and escorted her to an office for further questioning in the presence of law enforcement. Because the superinten­dent had a “reasonable, articulable suspicion” to temporarily detain Lawson for questioning regarding possession of a firearm on school grounds, the court ruled that the detention was constitutionally permissible. This suspicion was based on reports the superintendent had received, justifying a lawful detention. Further, Lawson’s voluntary search of her own bag was a consensual search and therefore did not violate the Fourth Amendment.

Practical Considerations

The Lawson decision delivers several practical lessons. First, schools should ensure through board policy and employee manuals that only building administrators or other designated school officials are authorized to conduct search and seizure activities. Second, those board policies and manuals should also clearly specify staff members’ responsibilities to report suspected criminal activity to appropriate personnel. Finally, administrators confronting potential weapons or safety threats should collaborate with law enforcement and legal counsel to safeguard employee constitutional rights while protecting the safety and well-being of the school buildings.

Following the steps outlined above will ensure that school officials only detain and search school employees when reasonable suspicion is present and potentially avoid Fourth Amendment and other constitutional violations.