Drug Testing Of The United States

Once it is established the testing method used passes the Daubert test, the court must determine admissibility based on the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment is the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable search and seizures, shall not be violated and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (US Const.)

Drug testing athletes or even just college students is against the students and Linn State’s fourth amendment rights. College students have the right to be secure in themselves, house, and papers. “On the con side of the argument, the American Civil Liberties Union along with with students attending Linn State say that drug testing of all college students is against the law and violation of their fourth amendment right” (Clabaugh 3). According to Jason Clabaugh, students have a right to not be drug tested because of their fourth amendment of having the right to be secure of themselves. Also sometimes test can lead to false positives. “On the con side of testing the college student athlete population, drug tests can often lead to false positives” (Clabaugh 4). Although, it’s likely to be a false positive it might not

In the case of Vernonia v. Acton the fourth amendment is involved. The fourth amendment states that all people should be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Vernonia School District found that student athletes were participating in drug use after an official investigation, because of this they began requiring random drug testing for the students to participate in school sports. A student at the school, James Acton, and his parents did not consent to the random testing so he was not allowed to participate in football. Because he was not allowed, it was questioned if random drug testing of the student athletes violated the reasonable search and seizure clause of the fourth amendment.

The case was argued to the U.S. Supreme Court on March 28, 1995. The court noted that the Fourth Amendment, which forbids unreasonable searches and seizures, was extended via the Fourteenth Amendment to cover searches and seizures by state officers, including those at public schools. Since the collection and testing of urine under the school policy was a search and thus subject to the Fourth Amendment, the Court decided a reasonableness test would be required. As a result, the court stated that while school officials are technically agents of the state, because of their custodial relationship with their students, the school faculty have authority to act in-loco-parentis to make sure the children they are responsible for are kept safe. The court

New Jersey statute N.J.A.C. 6A:16-4.4 raises a host of legal and financial issues for school district administrators. According to the law, when it comes to random testing of student alcohol and other drug use, districts that decide to do random drug tests must follow certain protocols to ensure students’ 4th Amendment rights are not violated.

The issue of drug testing in the workplace has sparked an ongoing debate among management. There are many who feel that it is essential to prevent risks to the greater public caused by substance abuse while on the job. However, others believe that the costs far outweigh the benefits and that it is an invasion of privacy. Putting all ethical issues aside, evidence presented in this paper supports the latter. The costs of drug testing are excessive and only a small percentage of employees are actually found to be substance users. Drug testing in the work place has a negative effect on productivity; contrary to what was originally intended. It actually decreases productivity

2. The Supreme Court established that a warrant isn’t necessary in school due to the fact that students aren’t under the protection of police officers but instead by the school. The court decided that a search is reasonable if a) “specific facts, together with rational inference from those facts, justified the intrusion, and b) the search was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances justifying it. Also, there can be random drug testing for students in school involved in extracurricular activities, and

In the case of New Jersey v T.L.O a high school student was suspected of trying to hide cigarettes in her bag. An official searched the bag and found cigarettes,marijuana, and a list of names of students who owed T.L.O. money, she argued that her Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches was violated. She was then charged with possession of marijuana and sentenced to one year of probation. Before trial, T.L.O. wanted to suppress the evidence discovered in the search, but the Court denied her motion. The supreme court said school administrators don't need to have a search warrant or probable cause before conducting a search because students already have a reduced expectation of privacy when in

According to Essex(2012), drug testing students would be in violation of the fourth amendment and would be difficult to justify because the students are protected under their privacy protection rights.As discussed in the text it was decided in the year 2002 during the case of Board of Education V. Earls when the supreme court had ruled that students who are participating in extracurricular activities must undergo a mandatory drug screenings and it became constitutional (Essex, 2012,p.35).

The Supreme Court sided with Vernonia in a 6-3 decision. The majority opinion of the SCOTUS was delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia. (Justices Stevens, O’Connor and Souter sided with Acton; Justices Rehnquist, Thomas, Breyer, Kennedy, Ginsburg and Scalia sided with Vernonia). Scalia argued that the 4th amendment protects citizens against police probing their homes/properties with unjustified reasons. Scalia says that the prevention of drug use was a justified reason for random drug tests. Scalia also pointed out that the amendment usually covers police intruding into someone’s home without a warrant. He says that students are in the temporary custody of the school, and it is the school’s responsibility for them. He argued that public schools

Drug testing originally began in the U.S. as a prevention strategy during the Vietnam War. In 1982, the U.S. Navy began randomly drug testing all active duty personnel following a tragic accident on the carrier Nimitz which was due to impairment from illegal drug use. Shortly thereafter random drug testing was extended to all active duty military personnel. Later on, because of concerns about public safety, the Federal Government expanded drug testing to workers in safety-sensitive industries in the late 1980s. At that time drug testing became standard for many private and government employers. Due to these positive improvements in the workplace, public and private schools, since 1995 have incorporated random drug testing into their comprehensive

In many years, companies adopted many programs to monitor substance abuse in the workplace. The implementation of drug testing by companies grew in recent years. American workers have seen a dramatic increase in the use of drug testing in the previous years. Drug testing is implemented to assure safe workplaces for American workers. Drug testing can reduce the company’s health care and insurance costs. Even though drug testing has become common in the workplace, there is little research that exists regarding this matter. Overall, drug testing affects the decisions of workers by adopting a “zero tolerance” policy. Experienced users try to beat these tests by using drug to cancel the tracking of the drug itself. These workers attempt to avoid the detection of drug use for long periods (Borack, 1995).

Have you ever felt your rights are being taken away? The Hebron Middle School Handbook says, “Four categories of 9-12 students will be the focus of a “testing program” where they will be pulled away to have to take a random drug test that will be sent to the parents with the result and procedure included.” The fourth amendment of the Constitution says that there should be no unreasonable searches. Unless the school has reasonable evidence that a student is using an illegal drug, random drug testing could fall under this amendment. Students may feel they are having their rights taken from them, and they may be more likely to start abusing drugs because they feel disrespected. This rule should be changed before more students feel their rights are being taken from them.

In order to keep organization ethical as it relates to drug testing, the U.S. Supreme Court has approved four methods for drug testing. The organization can request a blood, breath, hair, or urine tests. These tests will not harm the job candidate or employee. The company will send the job candidate or employee to an off-site medical

There are many reasons why the school must have drug testing. A student must submit a urine that should be used for detection.(Mo/2011/par.1). The school must have a mission that there should be no drug users in the campus. Everyone must succeed in life. One reason is to preparethe studentsfor profitable employment. They are schools which have advisory councils that are made up of businesses taht would be potential businesses to hire the students that support their expertise. Through this, the school is moving forward toward its mission. If someone is tested positive, there should be no punishment. They have to meet with a counselor and they can participate in an activity which can help in avoiding drug abuse and