Pubdate: Sun, 18 Oct 1998
Source: Baltimore Sun (MD)
Copyright: 1998 by The Baltimore Sun, a Times Mirror Newspaper.
Contact:  http://www.sunspot.net/
Author: Gregory Kane

JUDGES SHOULD GET DRUG TESTS FOR PRESUMING ALL ARE GUILTY 

The nine nerveless Nellies currently ensconced on our Supreme Court
have just committed the wimp-out act of the year. Two weeks ago, the
pusillanimous justices refused to review a case out of Indiana, where
overzealous school officials imposed mandatory drug testing as a
condition for participating in extracurricular activities.

Picture it now. Chess club members puffing on a joint while they
decide to use a King's Gambit or a Sicilian Defense opening. Math club
members smoking crack between discussions on the finer points of
number theory.

These things must have happened in Rushville, Ind. It was there that
school officials instituted the mandatory drug testing ruling for
extracurricular activities. Four of the students and their parents
protested and filed suit. They must have had the curious idea that a
thing called presumption of innocence still existed in America and
that the drug-testing program flew in the face of it.

Well, America is changing. That presumption-of-innocence thing is
becoming old hat, especially in light of the increasingly laughable
"drug war." In the drug war, everyone's presumed guilty.

It started with random drug testing of servicemen, which was
reasonable enough. Soon, welfare recipients were added in some states,
and there's a certain logic to that. Taxpayers have a right to be
assured their tax dollars are not being used to subsidize addiction.
But isn't it going too far to demand that a high school student who
wants to be in the chess or math club has to pass a drug test?

Already, some private companies are requiring potential employees to
take drug tests as a condition of being hired. Private employers
probably figure they are saving themselves big headaches down the
road, but it's another example of the notion of presumption of
innocence being further eroded. In the drug war, everyone's presumed
guilty. You have to prove your innocence.

If that's the way this thing is going to go, fine. But let's expand
the pool of those presumed guilty. Let's expand the list of those who
should have mandatory drug tests. Let's not just pick on high school
students, welfare recipients and lowly enlisted men in our armed
services. Let's demand drug testing for society's honchos. We can
start with the Nine Ninnies on the high court -- and don't even bother
to pardon the pun.

After all, we don't want these veritable juggernauts of jurisprudence
to make a decision while under the influence of the Good Lord only
knows what. Why should we presume their innocence? The very nature of
their job means they are in a position to adversely affect society
much more than a high school student or welfare recipient. We should
be assured they're drug-free.

Why not the president? President Clinton would be the perfect chief
executive to initiate such a program. His judgment in the Monica
Lewinsky affair was so stupid that we could reasonably assume he did
it under the influence of something. So, let's give him one of those
urine flasks and see what's up.

Ditto for all those elected officials in the line of succession. Vice
President Al Gore, House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Senate President Pro
Tem Strom Thurmond and others in line for succession can queue up
right behind Clinton and do their duty.

Next in line would be every member of Congress. Enlisted men in our
armed services, who've probably long wondered if members of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff are subjected to the random drug tests they are, would
probably be delighted to know the same rules applied to the top brass.

Federal and state judges should be added to the list, as well as
lawyers. Doctors should face mandatory drug testing or lose their
licenses to practice. Under the presumption-of-guilt mania now
sweeping the country, states could require all licensed drivers to
take mandatory drug tests. All too many motorists are ripping and
racing along our highways and streets as if they're under the
influence of something anyway.

Add school board members, superintendents, principals and teachers to
the list. This is the logical extension of the Rushville mandatory
drug-testing edict. Officials there couldn't have overlooked it. If
you don't trust students, why trust those entrusted to educate them?

There's one final group that should be subjected to mandatory drug
testing: newspaper columnists. That should allay the fears of those
readers who may be wondering if this one was written under the
influence of something.
- ---
Checked-by: Patrick Henry