Pubdate: Fri, 28 Jun 2002
Source: Times Union (Albany, NY)
Copyright: 2002 Capital Newspapers Division of The Hearst Corporation
Contact:  http://www.timesunion.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/452
Author: Linda Greenhouse, New York Times

Justices Uphold Drug Tests In Schools

Support For Random Screening of Students Expands Earlier Ruling

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the widespread use of 
random drug testing of public school students in a significant expansion of 
an earlier ruling that endorsed drug testing for student athletes.

The 5-4 decision upheld a program in a rural Oklahoma district that 
required students engaged in "competitive" extracurricular activities, a 
category that includes the future homemakers' club, the cheerleading squad 
and the choir, to submit to random drug testing.

In emphasizing the "custodial responsibilities" of a public school system 
toward its students, rather than the details of how the program was 
organized, the majority opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas appeared to 
encompass random drug testing of an entire student population.

But one member of the majority, Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who wrote a 
concurring opinion while also signing Thomas', said it was significant that 
the program in the Tecumseh, Okla., school district "preserves an option 
for a conscientious objector" by limiting the scope to students in 
extracurricular activities.

Students who are found to be using drugs at Tecumseh High School are barred 
from their activities and referred for counseling, but are not otherwise 
disciplined or reported to the police. The policy was challenged by Lindsay 
Earls, an honor student active in several activities who is now attending 
Dartmouth College.

Thursday's decision was joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and 
Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy.

The dissenters were Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, John Paul Stevens, David 
H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

In another major decision, the court ruled 5-4 that judicial candidates may 
talk more freely about issues like abortion and school prayer while 
campaigning.

The high court, in throwing out limits in Minnesota, said the rules impose 
an unconstitutional gag order and that candidates for any office, including 
a judgeship, cannot be barred from discussing issues.

The free-speech ruling changes the political landscape just as 33 states 
are getting ready for elections. It provoked criticism among law groups, 
which called on candidates to limit their campaigning anyway lest the 
integrity of the judiciary be harmed.

"We have never allowed the government to prohibit candidates from 
communicating relevant information to voters during an election," said 
Scalia, writing for the majority.

"I do not agree with the court's 'an election is an election' approach," 
Ginsburg said in dissenting. "Judges are not political actors, and the 
First Amendment does not require that they be treated as politicians simply 
because they are elected."

O'Connor joined Scalia in overturning the rules, along with Rehnquist, 
Kennedy and Thomas.

Besides Ginsburg, dissenting were Stevens, Souter and Breyer.

The high court also outlawed, in a 6-3 ruling, the Alabama prison practice 
of chaining disruptive inmates to outdoor "hitching posts," calling it 
cruel and unusual punishment.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Larry Stevens