On April 9, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued its opinion in O.W. v. Carr, No. 24-1288, bringing clarity to an issue increasingly confronting school administrators in the digital age: what legal standard is required for a school administrator to search a student’s cell phone? In the Fourth Circuit, the answer is clear: the traditional “reasonable suspicion” standard applies to school searches of students’ cell phones.
Background
A 13-year-old male student received a sexually explicit image from a female classmate, which he then shared with other students. After teachers learned of the incident and reported it to the administration, the assistant principal questioned the student and searched the photo gallery on his cell phone. Subsequently, a school resource officer (SRO) became involved, and the student faced criminal charges in juvenile court, although those charges were later dismissed after the student completed the conditions of deferred disposition. The student sued on several grounds, including that the warrantless search of his cell phone by the assistant principal violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment. The District Court granted summary judgment motions for the Defendants, and the student appealed.
Legal Standard
Ordinarily, searches require a warrant supported by probable cause. Yet because of the need to maintain discipline, order, and safety in schools, the Supreme Court has held that a school administrator’s search requires only a reasonable suspicion.[1] Under this lower standard, a school search must be (1) justified at its inception, and (2) reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the interference in the first place.
The reasonable suspicion standard, however, was adopted well before the ubiquity of cell phones in society. In a more recent decision, Riley v. California,[2] the Supreme Court recognized that the search of a cell phone is especially intrusive, and that a warrant is generally required for the search of a cell phone by law enforcement.
Holding
The student argued that after Riley, probable cause is necessary for the search of a cell phone, even in the school setting. The Fourth Circuit was unpersuaded,[3] holding that the reasonable suspicion standard for school searches remains the proper standard, even for the search of a cell phone.
Applying the reasonable suspicion standard, the Fourth Circuit concluded that the assistant principal’s search was justified at its inception because by the time the assistant principal searched the student’s phone, the assistant principal had not only received a report that the student possessed the explicit photo but the student had also confessed to possessing the photo. The search was also reasonably related in scope because the search for the photo was limited to the phone’s photo gallery.
Importantly, the search was not at the behest of or in conjunction with the SRO. Rather, the assistant principal initiated and conducted the search with no direction from the SRO.
Practical Implications
Despite the unique and extensive privacy concerns arising with cell phones, the reasonable suspicion standard for a school search still applies, at least in the Fourth Circuit. This decision provides meaningful guidance for school administrators:
- Ensure the grounds for the search are well supported before beginning the search;
- Limit the scope of the search to where the evidence is likely to be found; and
- Take the lead in school investigations as deferring to SROs and other law enforcement may require a heightened standard.
[1] New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985).
[2] 573 U.S. 373 (2014).
[3] The Fourth Circuit noted that in Riley, the Supreme Court explained warrantless searches of cell phones may be justified in other instances. 573 U.S. at 401–02.
