Legal Clips, [May 2007]Washington’s state supreme court has heard a challenge to the random drug testing of student athletes. Some parents and students in the tiny Wahkiakum School District in the town of Cathlamet are fighting the district's policy of random urine tests of middle school and high school student athletes, which they say is an unconstitutional "suspicionless" search that violates privacy rights. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has gotten involved, hoping for a clear ruling that will declare the random testing unreasonable. The Wahkiakum district, citing the strong anti-drug stance of the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association and the district's desire to curb use of illegal or performance-enhancing drugs, says the random tests are a carefully tailored and narrow exception to the state's privacy protections. The district started random testing of student athletes' urine in October 1999. Positive tests can get a student suspended from a team. Two families with high school students sued the district. Last year, a state superior court ruled that testing students was reasonable after less-intrusive methods failed to address the drug threat. The case was appealed directly to the state supreme court. ACLU spokesman Doug Honig notes a few districts have similar policies and that others are watching for guidance from the court.
All nine high court justices peppered lawyers for the two sides with questions about locker-room privacy, how testing is conducted, and whether students in general and student athletes in particular have less expectation of privacy than the general population. Many of the judges’ questions appeared critical of the testing policy. The challengers’ lawyer, Eric Martin, argued that the state's constitution and a long line of cases guarantee privacy rights that are broader than those afforded under the U.S. Constitution. He said this should include the "right to control privacy of bodily fluids and bodily function" without an agent of the government forcibly taking a sample. Fred Johnson, who represents the district, said the schools have a "compelling interest" to combat drug abuse and unsafe sports. He argued student-athletes already have to pass physical exams and the random tests should be allowed as a narrow exception to the state's protection of privacy.
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
By David Ammons (Associated Press)
[Full story]
[Editor’s Note: The ACLU’s press release on the arguments is at the first link below, and background on other Washington school board drug testing policies and legal disputes is at the second. Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s upholding of random drug testing of students involved in extracurricular activities in Board of Educ. of Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822 (2002), opponents of such policies have opted to pursue legal challenges under state constitutional provisions they argue provide greater protections than those afforded by the U.S. Constitution. COSA members can access a 2003 overview at the third link that discusses the Wahkiakum and other cases. A 2005 resource on drug testing is posted at the last link.]
[ACLU press release]
[NSBA School Law pages on Lake Stevens school board policy]
Inquiry & Analysis
By Tom Burns
[Full article]
[NSBA Federal File on student drug testing]