Pubdate: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 Source: Philadelphia Inquirer (PA) Copyright: 1999 Philadelphia Newspapers Inc. Contact: http://www.phillynews.com/ Forum: http://interactive.phillynews.com/talk-show/ Author: Richard Carelli, Associated Press HIGH COURT RESTRICTS DRUG TESTING OF STUDENTS, LEAVES CURFEW INTACT WASHINGTON -- Handling two disputes over the rights of teenagers and parents, the Supreme Court yesterday let a city continue imposing a nighttime curfew but barred two high schools from requiring drug tests for all students suspended for disciplinary reasons. The justices left intact a Charlottesville, Va., curfew for children under 17 and rejected Indiana school officials' effort to have their drug-testing policy reinstated. The two actions were not decisions, set no precedents, and did not preclude the possibility that the justices may choose someday to study each issue more closely. A nighttime curfew for minors, now employed by many American communities, has never been fully reviewed by the nation's highest court. Yesterday's action may encourage other communities to consider adopting similar ordinances. The court's denial of review in the Indiana case, meanwhile, is likely only to confuse the murky legal status of student drug-testing. Lawyers for the Anderson Community School Corp. had sought to revive, at two Anderson, Ind., high schools, a drug-testing policy that they called vital to "deterring drug and alcohol use among students." A federal appeals court struck down the 1997 policy, ruling that suspended students could not be required to take a urine test before being reinstated unless they were suspected of using drugs or alcohol. Test results had been disclosed only to parents and a designated school official and had not been used for additional punishment. James R. Willis 2d was a freshman at Highland High School when he was suspended for five days in December 1997 for fighting. The school official to whom Willis was taken right after his fight later testified that there was no indication he had been using drugs or alcohol. Willis refused to take the required drug test for readmission, and, with his father, sued the school district. The Supreme Court in 1995 ruled in an Oregon case that random drug tests for student athletes did not violate the Constitution's Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches. Last October, the justices rejected a challenge to a policy in another Indiana school district, in rural Rush County, that requires random drug testing for all students involved in extracurricular activities. But no court has ever condoned the random testing of all public school students. In striking down the drug-testing policy in Anderson, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit distinguished between it and those involved in the Oregon and Rush County cases. "A testing policy for students in athletics or other extracurricular activities applies only to students who have voluntarily chosen to participate in an activity," the appeals court said in Anderson Community School Corp. v. Willis. "Drug testing could be construed as part of the 'bargain' a student strikes in exchange for the privilege of participating in favored activities." The curfew controversy from Virginia addressed in Schleifer v. Charlottesville stemmed from the city council's 1996 vote to impose curfew hours -- midnight to 5 a.m. weekdays and 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. weekends -- for anyone under 17. The curfew, which took effect in early 1997, contains exceptions for minors accompanied by a parent or on an errand for a parent and possessing an explanatory note, or attending school, religious or civic activities. Exceptions also exist for minors working or commuting to or from work, or for minors "exercising First Amendment rights" such as the free exercise of religion. A group of teenagers and their parents sued, saying the curfew violated their rights. A federal appeals court ruled that Charlottesville "was constitutionally justified in believing that its curfew would materially assist its first stated interest -- that of reducing juvenile violence and crime." Most curfews for minors have been upheld in state and federal courts, but there have been exceptions. Curfews in San Diego, Allentown, Pa., and the District of Columbia are among those struck down when challenged. Charlottesville officials told the justices that those curfews did not provide all the exceptions contained in their city ordinance. - --- MAP posted-by: Patrick Henry