Crime | Supreme Court High Court Skeptical of Strip-Search Case And sounds skeptical By Kevin Spak Posted Apr 22, 2009 7:30 AM CDT Copied Savana Redding, center, and her mother April Redding, second from right, are surrounded by members of the media during a statement outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Tuesday, April 21, 2009. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci) Savana Redding’s lawyers made their case before the Supreme Court yesterday, condemning the strip-search of a 13-year-old in a hunt for ibuprofen as unreasonable search and seizure. But the justices were skeptical, the LA Times reports, with their questions indicating they were leery of limiting school officials’ powers to look for drugs, which might be more serious than ibuprofen. “How is the school administrator supposed to know?” asked John Roberts. Redding’s ACLU lawyer said the search was unreasonable no matter the drug, because there was no reason to think the honor student was concealing pills in her underwear. Stephen Breyer wasn’t so sure. “They will stick them in their underwear,” he said, of kids and pills. “And in my experience, people did sometimes stick things in my underwear.” Breyer went on to wonder if strip searches were particularly embarrassing, given that students change clothes for gym class. Read These Next A Virginia politician was set on fire at his office. One wrong step costs teen at Yellowstone. This Fed decision was unlike any other in decades. Delta sued after masturbation videos end up on child's lost iPad. Report an error