cannabisnews.com: A.C.L.U. To Sue Over Student Drug Testing!





A.C.L.U. To Sue Over Student Drug Testing!
Posted by FoM on August 18, 1999 at 08:30:18 PT
By Jacques Steinberg
Source: New York Times
In a pointed challenge to a policy adopted by an increasing number of the nation's high schools, the American Civil Liberties Union said it would file suit Wednesday against an Oklahoma school district that administers drug tests to students who want to participate in extracurricular activities like the debate team, chorus and Future Farmers of America.
Though the U.S. Supreme Court refused last year, without comment, to hear a challenge to a drug-test requirement for after-school programs at an Indiana high school, the ACLU contends that the Tecumseh School District in Oklahoma has gone a critical step further: Many extracurricular activities are tied to courses during the regular school day. Thus, according to the ACLU and the two teen-age plaintiffs it is representing in the suit, anyone at Tecumseh High School who refuses to submit to the urine test required for the choir, for example, would have to drop the accompanying music course, which provides a credit for graduation. And that, the civil liberties union argues, is a violation of a student's right to a public education, as well as of the Fourth Amendment protection against illegal search and seizure. Graham Boyd, a lawyer for the ACLU's National Drug Policy Litigation Project, wrote in papers that the group intends to file that by "targeting a group of students who are relatively unlikely to use drugs" and who are participating in activities with "no physical danger," the district was not addressing a "proven problem." In filing a complaint in federal District Court in Oklahoma City against Tecumseh, the school district of a rural town about 45 miles to the southeast, the civil liberties union says it is attempting to check a rash of tests for illegal substances that, while largely accepted when applied to athletes, have recently been applied to thousands of students involved in more cerebral pursuits. Individual school districts in Idaho, North Carolina and Wyoming, among other states, have implemented similar policies for cheerleaders, language club members and chess competitors in the last year, while other districts in Wisconsin, South Carolina, Ohio and Florida are considering expanding such testing to nonathletes. Proponents argue that an extracurricular activity is a privilege, not a right, and should be open only to those who are demonstrably drug- and alcohol-free. "School districts get blamed for a lot of different things," said Linda Meoli, a lawyer representing the Oklahoma district. "Unfortunately, we have to be policemen, we have to be psychologists, we have to be parents, and educators are far down the list. Some school districts feel like they have to take a proactive role in keeping children safe." But Lindsay Earls, 16, one of the two plaintiffs in the Oklahoma case, says the policy is less about safety than a humiliating invasion into students' lives. On Jan. 12, she said in an interview, she was pulled out of a choral rehearsal in the middle of the school day and escorted to the girls' bathroom. There, she said, a monitor stood guard outside a stall while she filled a cup with urine. Lindsay said that while she opposed the test philosophically, she did not want to be dropped from the choir, and so she consented. "I would have been out of my activities, which is unacceptable to me," she said. As in other districts -- including Winston-Salem/Forsyth in North Carolina, and smaller localities like Campbell County, Wyo., and Council, Idaho -- the policy in Tecumseh applies to "illegal and/or performance-enhancing drugs," including alcohol, marijuana and amphetamines. Though the testing was random last year, when the policy began, students were told to present samples before joining activities this year, Lindsay said. The superintendent of schools referred all questions to Ms. Meoli, the district lawyer, who refused to answer any questions about the policy's implementation, including whether any tests had returned positive. Though the policy says that no student will be subject to "academic sanctions," Lindsay said she knew of several students who had to drop out of the choir, and its academic course, because they refused to consent to a drug test. In that respect, the Oklahoma district's policy breaks with that of Rush County, Ind., the district whose policy was challenged as high as the Supreme Court last year, having been upheld by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago. In Rush County, a district 45 minutes southeast of Indianapolis, students who fail the drug test -- or decline to take it -- are barred from after-school activities and concerts, as well as from driving to school, but can keep any course credits by sitting in with the band or debate team during meetings in the regular school day. Ed Lyskowinski, the superintendent in Rush County, said that of 250 students tested in the high school last year, 30 tested positive for tobacco, a substance barred by the policy, and one student tested positive for marijuana. "We adopted this policy," he said, "so students could say on Friday night, 'I don't want to drink, I don't want to smoke, because next week I want to participate in an athletic contest or whatever extracurricular activity, or drive to school."' Because the Supreme Court declined to take up the Rush County policy, it remains unclear how firm a precedent it will prove to be. The program in Rush County goes considerably beyond a student drug-testing policy that the Supreme Court upheld in 1995, in an Oregon case that applied only to student athletes. In that case, the court found that an existing drug problem and the role of athletes as student leaders justified the policy. For Daniel James, 16, the other plaintiff in the Oklahoma case, the district drug policy has put him in a predicament, making him choose between his "rights" and his extracurricular activities; he's a member of the academic team, which competes in statewide quiz competitions, which he knows are valued by college admissions officers. "This just really interferes with my academic goals," he said, "to go to a competitive college and not some slacker college." Pubdate: August 18, 1999Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #4 posted by Ethan Russo, MD on June 14, 2001 at 11:35:58 PT:
Dear Jane
I think that we all realized this about Lindsay. I am so proud that there are people such as you and your friend that are willing to address abuses of our government, even when it would be easier to merely follow the crowd and be quiet. It is only when people acknowledge injustice to others that progress is actually possible.Keep up the good work and the good attitude.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by Jane Doe on June 14, 2001 at 09:54:27 PT:
ACLU- Lawsuit
I am good friends with plaintiff Lindsay Earls. Many people in our community have said that she only filed this suit becuase had somehting to worry about. They say that if she didn't have anything to worry about in passing the test, then it shouldn't matter wheter the tests are required or not.  I am here to say that Lindsay is not that type of person. She has never done any type of drug in her life and our community, our socoety needs to overcome their superficial views and look into things more deeply. This is a question of our rights being violated which simply cannot be overlooked by conforming to a fascist system.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Robert A Washburn on October 31, 2000 at 08:44:53 PT:
O.M.M.A. and the workplace
I am an Oregon resident working as millwright for the past 4 years. Been a participant in the Oregon medical Marijuana act a little over a year now. My employer has had a hard time accepting Marijuana as medical,and now in their infinite wisdom they have placed me on a leave of abcense. without pay. They say that they willnot accept medical marijuana and I must give it up.. I do not use this medicine during my working hours and this I have shown them during my first year in the program.. The whole story is too long for me to type out, just thought I'd poke around to see if any body is interested in such a case..
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by FoM on August 18, 1999 at 09:03:24 PT:
Related Article
Students Challenge Activities Drug TestPublished WednesdayAugust 18, 1999The Herald-Leaderhttp://www.kentuckyconnect.com/By Jacques SteinbergNEW YORK TIMES NEWS SERVICEIn a pointed challenge to a policy adopted by an increasing number of the nation's high schools, the American Civil Liberties Union said it would file suit today against an Oklahoma school district that administers drug tests to students who want to participate in extracurricular activities such as the debate team.Though the U.S. Supreme Court refused last year, without comment, to hear a challenge to a drug-test requirement for after-school programs at an Indiana high school, the ACLU contends that the Tecumseh School District in Oklahoma has gone a critical step further: Many extracurricular activities are tied to courses during the regular school day.Thus, according to the ACLU and the two teen-age plaintiffs it is representing, anyone at Tecumseh High School who refuses to submit to the urine test required for the choir, for example, would have to drop the accompanying music course, which provides a credit for graduation.That, the ACLU argues, is a violation of a student's right to a public education, as well as of the Fourth Amendment protection against illegal search and seizure.Graham Boyd, an attorney for the ACLU's National Drug Policy Litigation Project, wrote in papers that the group intends to argue that by ``targeting a group of students who are relatively unlikely to use drugs'' and who are participating in activities with ``no physical danger,'' the district was not addressing a ``proven problem.''In filing a complaint in federal District Court in Oklahoma City against Tecumseh, the school district of a rural town about 45 miles to the southeast, the ACLU says it is attempting to check a rash of tests for illegal substances that, while largely accepted when applied to athletes, have recently been applied to thousands of students involved in more cerebral pursuits.Individual school districts in Idaho, North Carolina and Wyoming, among other states, have imposed similar policies for cheerleaders, language club members and chess competitors in the last year.Other districts in Wisconsin, South Carolina, Ohio and Florida are considering expanding such testing to non-athletes. Proponents argue that an extracurricular activity is a privilege, not a right, and should be open only to those who are drug- and alcohol-free.``School districts get blamed for a lot of different things,'' said Linda Meoli, an attorney representing the Oklahoma district. ``Unfortunately, we have to be policemen, we have to be psychologists, we have to be parents -- and educators are far down the list. Some school districts feel like they have to take a proactive role in keeping children safe.''But Lindsay Earls, 16, one of the two plaintiffs in the Oklahoma case, says the policy is less about safety than a humiliating invasion into students' lives. On Jan. 12, she said, she was pulled out of a choral rehearsal in the middle of the school day and escorted to the girls' bathroom. There, she said, a monitor stood guard outside a stall while she filled a cup with urine.Lindsay said that, although she opposed the test philosophically, she did not want to be dropped from the choir, and so she consented. ``I would have been out of my activities, which is unacceptable to me,'' she said.As in other districts -- including Winston-Salem/Forsyth in North Carolina, and smaller localities such as Campbell County, Wyo., and Council, Idaho -- the policy in Tecumseh applies to ``illegal and/or performance-enhancing drugs,'' including alcohol, marijuana and amphetamines. Though the testing was random last year, when the policy began, students were told to present samples before joining activities this year, Lindsay said.The superintendent of schools referred all questions to Meoli, the district's attorney, who refused to answer any questions about the policy's implementation, including whether any tests had returned positive.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: