Current Events, Sept 11, 1995 v95 n2 p1(2)
School drug tests: right or wrong? Many schools
could begin drug tests on athletes after Supreme
Court ruling.
Full Text: COPYRIGHT 1995 Weekly Reader Corp.
WASHINGTON, D.C It's September-back-to-school month the
USA. From Maine to Hawaii and from Florida to Alaska
students' thoughts have turned from summer fun to books,
classes, teachers, football, and-in some schools-drug tests.
Drug tests? Yes, drug tests.
Earlier this summer, on June 26, the U.S. Supreme Court
decided the case of Vernonia School District v. Acton. The
decision paved the way for schools to administer random drug
tests on student athletes.
Permission to Test
The case began in 1991, when James Acton was a 7th grader
in the Vernonia, Oregon, school system. All James wanted
then was to join his school's football team. But when he
brought home a permission slip for his parents to sign, they
refused. The slip granted permission for the school to submit
James to random drug testing. Such tests were required of all
student athletes in Vernonia.
Random meant that school officials could collect a urine
sample from any athlete-whether or not that athlete was
suspected of drug use--at any time during the season. Vernonia
had started such drug tests to cut down on what school
officials viewed as widespread drug use among students.
James himself, a good student, had never been suspected of
using illegal drugs.
Not only did the Actons not sign the permission slip, they sued
the school district, charging that random drug testing violated
students' rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution. The Fourth Amendment prohibits government
from conducting "unreasonable searches." The Actons charged
that Vernonia's policy of requiring random urine samples of
student athletes was unreasonable because it "searched," or
invaded, the bodies of all athletes, including those who had
never been suspected of drug use.
Lawyers for the school district argued that random drug testing
was "the only effective way to deal with a drug-use epidemic
among school-children."
Through the Court System
The judge who heard the case agreed with the school district,
ruling that random drug testing of student athletes was legal
and constitutional. But the Actons appealed the ruling to a
higher court.
The appeals court reversed the lower court ruling, agreeing
with the Actons that random drug testing of student athletes
did, violate the Fourth Amendment.
"Children are compelled to attend school," the appeals court
ruled. "While they must attend classes and follow school rules,
that does not indicate that they have given up their basic
privacy rights."
Vernonia school district appealed this decision to the highest
court in the land-the U.S. Supreme Court. Each year, the U.S.
Supreme Court agrees to hear important cases that affect the
constitutional rights of Americans. Many of the cases concern
the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution.
The nine Supreme Court justices carefully weighed the
arguments on both sides, then, by a majority of 6 to 3, decided
against James Acton and for the school district. Random drug
tests on student athletes, ruled the Court, are legal and
constitutional and do not violate the Fourth Amendment.
Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the majority opinion, said
that schools, as "guardians" of children have the right to act as
parents would act in similar situations, and random drug tests
in those circumstances are not unreasonable.
The decision was widely cheered-and just as widely booed.
'A Horrible Decision'
"It's a horrible decision," says Howard Simon of the American
Civil Liberties Union. "If young people . . . understand what the
Supreme Court did, they will understand that the Courts says
the Bill of Rights doesn't apply to them."
"Sadly, the Court, like much of society, has let the War on
Drugs overtake its good sense," argues an editorial in
Newsday. "By [supporting random drug testing], the Court
teaches a terrible lesson to school-children about the meaning
of freedom."
A Good Decision
Along with such widespread criticism of the Supreme Court's
decision, there was also widespread support. Supporters
believe that random drug tests will help reduce teen drug use.
(See graph on page 4.) They argue that school athletes-and the
kids who look up to them as models-may stop using drugs if
random testing is done by schools.
"This decision by the Supreme Court could make American
schools safer, American kids healthier, and high school
athletics fairer," says an editorial in the Arkansas
Democrat-Gazette. "At the least, it resurrects the idea that
schools have some responsibility for protecting their charges
against drugs."
BACKGROUND
The case of Vernonia School District v. Acton brings into focus
the current debate surrounding how much protection the Fourth
Amendment provides individuals. The key part of this
amendment states that: "The right of the people to be secure
in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated... "
Writing for the majority in the court's 6 to 3 vote on the case,
Justice Antonin Scalia said that students' rights under the
Fourth Amendment were outweighed by a school's interest in
ensuring a drug-free environment. Plus, Scalia added,
student-athletes-who often change clothing in cramped areas
and clean up in communal showers--have a low expectation of
privacy. "School sports," Scalia wrote, "are not for the
bashful."
Writing in dissent of the majority, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
disagreed. O'Connor criticized the court for allowing school
officials to search students who are not suspected of drug use.
The message to students, O'Connor said, is "that they have to
prove they're innocent."
In the wake of the ruling, reaction from school administrators
and teachers has been mixed. While many think drug testing
could make the playing field safer, others worry funds will be
diverted from already-dwindling supply budgets to cover
urinalysis exams.
Some administrators are concerned about what schools would
do if a student tested positive for drug use. Under the Vernonia
policy, student-athletes who test positive for drag use are
kicked off the team. No Vernonia student has ever tested
positive, however. "What are you going to do?" asks Ralph
Swearngin, associate director of the Georgia High School
Association. "Do we just dump these kids, or do we institute
some way of helping them?"
Despite the controversy, President Bill Clinton stands firmly
behind the Supreme Court's decision. The ruling, says Clinton,
"sends exactly the right message to parents and students:
Drug use will not be tolerated in our schools."