According to the federal complaint in Harrington v. Crawford, 18-year-old Jack Harrington was pulled out of class at Hillsboro-Deering High School and interrogated because administrators learned he lawfully owned a handgun.
The complaint says officials pressed him to allow a search of his truck in the student lot. He refused. His parents refused. The school searched anyway – and found no firearm.
Jack’s lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court, claims a violation of the Fourth Amendment. It asks for declaratory relief and nominal damages, not a payday – just a ruling that the search was unconstitutional.
What Sparked the Search, Per the Complaint
The complaint explains that weeks earlier, Jack casually told a teammate about an off-campus traffic stop where he informed an officer that his legally owned handgun was in the glove box. No threats. No drama. No school property involved.
Administrators allegedly heard fragments of that bus conversation through the rumor mill. On April 24, 2025, they pulled Jack from class, confirmed he owned a gun, and, per the complaint, began badgering him for consent to search his vehicle.
Jack said no. His parents, on speakerphone, also said no. The complaint quotes the school resource officer as saying: “You can say whatever you want, we’re going to search it anyway.”
What the AP Reported
Holly Ramer at AP News reported that Jack graduated in June and now has sued the superintendent, principal, vice principal, and the school resource officer.
AP notes the suit was filed with support from the Second Amendment Foundation.
Ramer’s article underscores the legal standard at issue: schools can conduct searches on reasonable suspicion, but the lawsuit argues that mere gun ownership – especially tied only to a past, off-campus event – falls short of that bar.
AP also quoted SAF’s Bill Sack, who warned that being open about exercising a right cannot become grounds for harassment or a search. The superintendent declined to comment to AP, citing pending litigation.
How William Kirk Frames the Case
Attorney William Kirk of Washington Gun Law did a full breakdown on his channel, walking viewers through the intersection of the Second and Fourth Amendments.
He says the core question is simple: did the school have facts that made a search reasonable?
Kirk emphasizes the complaint’s narrative – two “data points” filtered through rumor: Jack is a lawful gun owner, and he once legally had a gun in his glove box off campus. Kirk argues that’s nowhere near reasonable suspicion for a search on school grounds days later.
He also notes Jack’s lawsuit is about a declaration, not damages.
In Kirk’s view, this is a teachable moment about how constitutional rights interact inside school walls, and how administrators must still meet constitutional standards.
Jared Yanis’s Reaction and Why It Resonates
On Guns & Gadgets, host Jared Yanis tells the story with urgency. He stresses that New Hampshire is a constitutional carry state and that Jack, at 18, could legally own and transport a firearm.
Yanis frames the incident as punishment for obeying the law. He focuses on the power dynamic: an 18-year-old student, a principal’s office, a resource officer, and a search conducted after repeated refusals.
He praises the Second Amendment Foundation for bringing the case, noting that while the issue began with gun ownership, it now squarely tests the Fourth Amendment line for students in public schools.
What the Complaint Says About Consent
The complaint goes deep on consent. It recounts Jack repeatedly refusing and his parents clearly withholding permission on speakerphone. It describes stress, pressure, and a stated belief that the search would happen “no matter what.”
Legally, that matters. The complaint cites factors courts use to judge voluntariness – age, setting, knowledge of the right to refuse, and whether circumstances are coercive.
A principal’s office with multiple authority figures and a police officer is about as coercive as school gets.
It further alleges the school later tried to label the search a mere “view.” The complaint rejects that characterization, pointing out officials allegedly forced open the locked truck and rummaged through the contents.
Both the complaint and the AP piece point to N.J. v. T.L.O., the Supreme Court case setting the school-search standard: reasonable suspicion, and scope tied to the justification.
Kirk underlines that even in schools, searches must be reasonable. He says the complaint argues there were no facts connecting Jack to any on-campus wrongdoing that day, or any day, and thus no basis to search.
Yanis goes a step farther rhetorically, saying the search happened not due to conduct, but due to identity as a lawful gun owner. That framing is provocative, but it captures the complaint’s theme: you can’t use lawful behavior as the trigger for a search.
New Hampshire Law Isn’t the School’s Escape Hatch
The complaint spends time on New Hampshire’s permitless carry framework to show Jack’s conduct off campus was lawful. It also notes that state law bars firearms at school, making any on-campus possession a police matter – yet the complaint quotes a school official saying, “This is a school issue, not a police issue.”
Kirk highlights that line to argue the school itself seemed to admit it lacked a criminal basis for police action, reinforcing the absence of reasonable suspicion.
AP’s reporting adds the district’s current stance: no comment during litigation. That keeps the record focused on the complaint’s allegations and the public statements from outside groups and commentators.
Why This Case Feels Bigger Than One Truck
Here’s where my commentary comes in. This dispute sits on a fault line between safety and rights. Schools have a duty to keep campuses safe. But safety cannot swallow the Constitution.
If mere status – “this student’s family owns guns” or “this student once carried legally” – becomes enough to search, then a lot more than trucks will get opened. The standard would drift from acts to assumptions. That’s not how rights work.
The case is also fascinating because the remedy requested is lean: a declaration and nominal damages. That signals this isn’t a lottery ticket. It’s a line-drawing exercise. Where does reasonable suspicion begin, and where does it end?
Another Angle Worth Noting
My second bit of commentary: the attempted rebrand from “search” to “view” – as described in the complaint and discussed by Yanis – shows how words get stretched when institutions feel cornered.
Courts care less about labels and more about what happened. If officials directed a student to open a locked vehicle and then physically inspected compartments, that’s a search in any plain reading.
If a judge agrees, the opinion could become a short, sharp reminder to schools nationwide: your authority is broad, but not boundless.
From AP’s vantage point, the lawsuit is now public and the district won’t comment. That’s standard. The Second Amendment Foundation, quoted by AP and featured by Guns & Gadgets, says the case is about protecting both Second and Fourth Amendment boundaries.
William Kirk, in his Washington Gun Law video, frames it as a chance to educate the public on how those rights interact and to reinforce the reasonable suspicion standard in schools.
And the complaint itself is the backbone of it all, alleging that a student was searched for being exactly what the law allows: a lawful gun owner, off campus, weeks before, with no on-campus threat.
The Stakes for Students and Parents
AP emphasizes the national relevance: if the court sides with Jack, districts may have to tighten their processes and train staff better on when a search is actually justified. If it doesn’t, the door cracks open to searches grounded in status rather than facts.
Yanis warns that parents should care because today it’s guns; tomorrow it could be something else – politics, hobbies, or associations. Kirk cautions that rights must be learned and lived, even in schools.
The complaint puts it bluntly: you can’t teach good citizenship by violating the Constitution.
From the complaint’s detailed chronology to AP’s straightforward reporting, from Yanis’s fiery defense to Kirk’s legal walkthrough, the narrative is consistent: there’s a serious question whether a school can search a student’s car based only on hearsay about lawful gun ownership.
If the court declares this search unconstitutional, the ruling will echo far beyond one New Hampshire parking lot. It will set a bright line: status isn’t suspicion.
And that, in a country built on rights, is a lesson worth teaching.
UP NEXT: “Heavily Armed” — See Which States Are The Most Strapped
Image Credit: Survival World
Americans have long debated the role of firearms, but one thing is sure — some states are far more armed than others. See where your state ranks in this new report on firearm ownership across the U.S.
Ed spent his childhood in the backwoods of Maine, where harsh winters taught him the value of survival skills. With a background in bushcraft and off-grid living, Ed has honed his expertise in fire-making, hunting, and wild foraging. He writes from personal experience, sharing practical tips and hands-on techniques to thrive in any outdoor environment. Whether it’s primitive camping or full-scale survival, Ed’s advice is grounded in real-life challenges.