by confiscating a student’s pro-drug banner); that public educational institutions have the right “to adopt and enforce reasonable, nondiscriminatory regulations as to the time, place and manner of student expressions and demonstrations,” Bayless v. Martine, 430 F.2d 873, 878 (5th Cir.1970) (citing Williamson v. Lee Optical, 348 U.S. 483, 487-88, 75 S.Ct. 461, 464, 99 L.Ed. 563 (1955)); and that school officials must be permitted “to prescribe and control conduct in the schools.” Tinker, 393 U.S. at 507, 89 S.Ct. at 737 (citing Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97, 104, 89 S.Ct. 266, 270, 21 L.Ed.2d 228 (1968); Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 402, 43 S.Ct. 625, 627, 67 L.Ed. 1042 (1923)). See also Bd. of Educ. v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822, 829-30, 122 S.Ct. 2559, 153 L.Ed.2d 735 (2002) (<HOLDING>), cited in Morse, supra, — U.S. at —, 127 S.Ct.
recognizing the districts duty of care for the protection of school children in its schools holding a fourth amendment terry detention is not a custodial arrest and the use of handcuffs does not automatically convert a temporary detention into a fourth amendment arrest recognizing an implied fourth amendment action for damages recognizing the schools custodial and tutelary responsibility for children in the fourth amendment context holding that fourth amendment not violated when officer makes custodial arrest for driving without a seatbelt