By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
School officials in New Hampshire have acknowledged they conducted an unconstitutional search of a student’s vehicle in 2025, because he legally owned a handgun—which was not in the vehicle, nor was it ever brought to the grounds of Hillsboro-Deering High School—in full compliance with federal and state laws.
According to the Second Amendment Foundation, which filed a federal civil rights lawsuit last October on behalf of plaintiff Jack Harrington, the search was conducted “solely on the basis of school officials learning that Harrington lawfully owned a firearm in his personal life.”
The case is known as Harrington v. Crawford. The case was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire.
According to a stipulated declaratory judgment, “A search of a student’s person, property, or vehicle based solely on the exercise of a constitutional or legal right, including the fundamental right to keep and bears arms guaranteed under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (U.S. CONST. amend. II), which encompasses and includes the right to carry, store, or transport a handgun a vehicle or in the glove box of a vehicle, would constitute an unconstitutional and illegal search in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”
This search occurred after Harrington apparently mentioned his gun ownership to another student while riding in a bus enroute to a game.
As noted in the original 18-page complaint, “Defendants had no probable cause or reasonable suspicion to support their search of the subject vehicle (Harrington’s truck) because there was no credible reason to believe that the handgun was in the Vehicle on that day, that Jack ever brought the handgun to school (he never did), or that he intended to bring his handgun to school. No part of the conversation between Jack and his teammate even suggested that Jack had ever or would ever bring a firearm to school.”
Yet school officials and a local police officer interrogated Harrington and conducted the search after both he and his parents refused to give permission for the search, which occurred on April 24, 2025.
“Publicly acknowledging that you’re a gun owner does not justify endless harassment or subject you to invasive searches,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “The overwhelming majority of gun owners are law-abiding peaceable people for their entire lives. Simply choosing to exercise your rights under the Second Amendment does not imply that you may do something criminal with a firearm and does not create reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed. If that were the case, then lawful gun owners like Mr. Harrington would not just be subject to search of their property on one day – but every day – unless and until they prove that they have sold their constitutionally protected property to the satisfaction of school officials. The Constitution prevents precisely that outcome and worked exactly as designed in this case.”
The case was widely reported when first filed last year.
“Maintaining safety on school grounds is a laudable goal,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “But the Constitution demands that school officials have, at minimum, reasonable suspicion to search a student’s property. Critically, choosing to exercise one’s Second Amendment rights cannot be interpreted as a waiver of your rights under the Fourth Amendment, nor can it create reasonable suspicion of a crime. We’re pleased the school district here has admitted their errors and reinforced that the fundamental rights of their students will be respected.”
As noted in the original complaint, “…after the Interrogation in which Jack repeatedly refused to consent to a search and after Jack’s parents were contacted by phone and similarly refused to consent to a search, Defendants searched the Subject Vehicle anyway, finding no firearm.”
The complaint has been dismissed with prejudice.
