Although courts have recognized that minors have fourth amendment privacy protection in criminal proceedings and a privacy interest in general, the scope of a minor's right to fourth amendment protection in a juvenile court setting is unclear. The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to consider whether alleged juvenile offenders are entitled to fourth amendment protection. States that have recognized fourth amendment rights have limited both the class of juvenile offender protected and the scope of protection itself. Furthermore, State courts have not sufficiently explained the reasons for granting alleged juvenile offenders fourth amendment protection, thereby leaving the subject open to debate. The first section of this comment argues that minors in a juvenile court setting are entitled to full fourth amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. An analysis of the Supreme Court's recent criticisms of the juvenile justice system and its grants of certain due process protections to alleged juvenile offenders reveals that the earlier reasons for denying minors fourth amendment protection are no longer valid. To grant minors fourth amendment protection, however, and also allow a parent an unfettered right to consent to the search of the child's room or belongings, as some State courts have done, is to provide the child with no more than illusory protection. The second section of the comment argues that a parent's right to control his/her child should not take precedence over the child's right to privacy, because parental consent is not in the minor's best interests. A parent, therefore, should be held to the same limitations that apply in normal fourth amendment third-party consent situations. A total of 116 notes are listed. (Author abstract modified)