Supreme Court approves random drug tests for many public high schools

Associated Press / SFGate

[RCW2001]

URL: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2002/06/27/national1005EDT0546.DTL

(06-27) 07:05 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --

The Supreme Court approved random drug tests for many public high school students Thursday, ruling that schools' interest in ridding their campuses of drugs outweighs an individual's right to privacy.

The 5-4 decision would allow the broadest drug testing the court has yet permitted for young people whom authorities have no particular reason to suspect of wrongdoing. It applies to students who join competitive after-school activities or teams, a category that includes many if not most middle-school and high-school students.

Previously these tests had been allowed only for student athletes.

©2002 Associated Press  

[FreeTally]

Imagine the problems encountered had it been necessary for me to submit to a piss test to receive my conceal carry permit?

The court will one day rule that drug tests are fine for anything that has tax money in any way attached to it(except government employees). Just wait.

[goodieD]

just when I was happy about the voucher thing, they do something like this. I'm sure the WOD people are peeing their pants in joy over this. "To hell with the kids..they don't have any rights" and "isn't getting rid of drugs more important than ANYTHING?" (just ask that poor kid they shot in the back about that one).

[Diddle E. Squat]

Utter nonsense, you've learned well from Paul Begala. Jerry Falwell and the fundamentalist jihad are probably behind this, right?

"Libertarians For Leahy".

[FreeTally]

Rather than legalizing drugs, let's just make the blanket assumption that all Americans everywhere are high on crack - and then force them to prove their innocence on a round the clock, every day basis. Public piss tests for everyone. Line 'em up right there on the square, nude to maximize their humiliation and then scream "hippie!" at anyone who dares disagree.

Based on their reasoning that "the schools desire to eliminate drugs outweighs privacy", I would not be surprised if the SCOTUS made such a ruling.

[maestro]

GREAT!!!!........Its about time they start 'testing' the NEA's pubic school teachers and administrators!!!!

[RJCogburn]

Breyer agreed w/ the majority. That's surprising

Right...it looks like SDO'Connor is the only justice to get the correct answers today.

[Diddle E. Squat]

They should go piss test the ghettos

Please tell me that your not in denial about drug use in suburbs and rural areas? Although there may be higher concetrations of users in the inner-city, use crosses the spectrum.

[Lent]

Pathetic. This kind of zeal and obsession regarding drugs was bound to whittle away fundamental rights. This should be a good lesson for our kids. Raise them to live in fear and paranoia about big-brother bringing the axe down on them.

[Wolfie]

Justice Thomas has only admitted to toking it up at law school. I'll leave everyone to ponder the irony of that.

[RJCogburn]

Works for me. There are many ways in which we treat minors differently.

Flawed reasoning in that some of these students are 18 or older, old enough to fight and die for us, old enough to vote.

[TightSqueeze]

…you've learned well from Paul Begala. - Who Dat, and what did I miss?

Jerry Falwell and the fundamentalist jihad are probably behind this, right?
No like Mongo, these people are merely pawns in the game of life.

[SouthernFreebird]

Yea, I'm ready to blow a gasket....... My kids who choose to do somthing constructive with their time WILL not be treated as a criminal!


I'm ready to secede should the South ever decide to revisit a past dream.......

[Flashlight]

...I pledge allegiance to the flag of the...
...Hey you! Shut up and piss in the cup!...

You hit the nail on the head. You said it better than I ever could. (Let me try anyway...)

"And I'm proud to be an A-mer-i-can..
where at least I know I'm free..."
"Hey you! Shut up and piss in the cup!..."

God Bless America, what's left of it.

[Diddle E. Squat]

You force kids to choose between their right to privacy and their future (university, career, etc.).

Baloney. Nice cut-n-paste argument from the pro-Affirmative Action crowd. So suddenly if a kid doesn't get into Harvard, he's doomed to failure? There are plenty of universities out there, someone with talent and initiative can succeed no matter where they attend. Extracurricular participation is only one of many criteria used to choose between competing qualified applicants(or not so qualified AA'd kids who assert a similar 'right to' argument).

Yeah, yeah, there are so many homeless wandering the streets because they didn't participate in high school drama or drill team.

[Teacher317]

This decisions forces students to choose between their right to privacy and, potentially, their future as a student.

Odd that you don't mention the third option... not breaking the law by doing drugs in the first place, making this entire discussion moot.

[Viva Le Dissention]

Even though you're joking, I suggest you watch what you say--given the current attitude of our government, you might be called a war criminal and then held in military prison without a trial and then shot. :-) Friendly advice.

[ganesha]

For a poor family, it would be difficult if not impossible to pay for the cost of college without an athletic scholarship. A university education has a major impact on lifetime earning potential.

Not having a car would be inconvenient but people can ride bicycles if they have to. More importantly, the rules against drunk driving are based on a proven risk to others. The football team may have a right to test for steroids in order to protect the integrity of the sport, but testing all participants in all extra-curricular activities for all drugs goes too far. Rules against drug use should reflect direct harm done to others and not just be an attempt to police people for their own good.

[Teacher317]

The Court has no problem at all ruining a kid's future if he wants to protect his right.

So now we have the Right to break the law? Interesting argument.

[SouthernFreebird]

No I'm not in denial.... I know they should address KNOWN problems and not the COULD BE'S... Doesn't that make more sence?


Deal with the drugs getting here..... Take on the mafias and drug runners....not teens playing football for crying out load.

[Viva Le Dissention]

Not Harvard, any quality school.

And it doesn't matter whether they are "doomed to failure" or not--the fact that you are forcing kids to choose is the problem. If you go to State U. you certainly may not be a failure, but that forcing a child to decide between his right to privacy and a shot at an excellent university is not right.

As far as teacher goes, I obey the law and I don't want to be drug tested. Somehow that makes me a criminal? I don't have anything illegal in my home, but I don't want the FBI searching it for no reason. Does that make me a bad person? A Criminal? There is NO 3rd option here. It is privacy v. future.