“The issue of drug testing has caused a national debate that still persists. The debate hinges on the right to privacy of the athlete and whether such testing is constitutional under the U.S. Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure” (Siedentop, 1998, p. 149). This issue has been presented in front of many courts, resulting in different rulings.

A student athlete drug testing case, in an Oregon school district, resulted in a U.S. Supreme Court hearing. In the Vernonia school district all student athletes, between the grades of seven and twelve, were required to participate in the drug testing policy. According to Phelps at the Washington Bureau (1995), the mandatory urinalysis required boys to provide samples at urinals, with teachers watching from behind, while gi

One seventh grader, James Acton, disagreed with this policy and refused to submit a urine sample. Acton’s defiance resulted in his being thrown off of the football team. With the help of the American Civil Liberties Union, Acton and his parents filed a suit, claiming that James’ Fourth Amendment rights were being violated. The Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision ruled against the Actons, finding that “public schools plagued with drug use among students can require their athletes to submit to drug testing” (Phelps, 1995, p. A05). In a White House statement following the ruling, President Clinton supported the court’s decision saying it “sends exactly the right message to parents and students: Drug use will not be tolerated in our schools” (Phelps, 1995, p. A05).

Rita Sklar, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arkansas asserts that the “Fourth Amendment ensures that all Americans will not be treated like criminals just to catch the few criminals among them. The same should go for young Americans” (ACLU, 1997). School officials should not violate a student’s privacy without reasonable suspicion that they have done something wrong. It is this suspicionless, random search that the ACLU finds to be a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Opponents of these drug testing programs find it unnecessary because “if school officials have reason to believe that a particular student is using drugs, they already have the power to require that student to submit to a drug test”

Some topics in this essay:
President Clinton, Supreme Court, Amendment Opponents, Fourth Amendment, Washington Bureau, , ACLU Jersey, Attorney Rocah, Judge Moses, Supreme Court’s, drug testing, aclu 1997, athlete drug, athlete drug testing, student athlete, student athlete drug, student athletes, fourth amendment, seizures” aclu 1997, random drug, drug education, searches seizures” aclu, searches seizures”, supreme court, random drug testing,