APPEALS COURT BACKS TEST BAN

It is the legal equivalent of a slam-dunk against Gov. Mike Foster's plan
to drug-test elected officials in Louisiana. The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of
Appeals upheld a federal district judge's ruling that the new law is
unconstitutional.

The three-judge panel of the circuit court tersely upheld U.S. District
Judge Eldon Fallon of New Orleans, who said the law violates the Fourth
Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

The one-paragraph opinion of the circuit court praised Fallon's "complete
and well-crafted opinion."

But Foster will appeal, according to spokeswoman Marsanne Golsby.

We believe the governor ought to huddle with his lawyers and reconsider an
appeal.

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Georgia law in 1997 that required
political candidates to pass drug tests. The high court said drug testing
of political hopefuls invades their Fourth Amendment privacy rights unless
the government can prove a "special need" to test them.

The new Louisiana law was symbolism more than anything else, as Foster was
willing to concede: He admitted that he expected few elected officials to
actually be caught using drugs. Foster and other members of his staff got
an all-clear on drug tests they took last year.

We commend two legislators, Arthur Morrell and the late Avery Alexander,
both of New Orleans, who challenged this inane statute in court.

This law is of Rube Goldberg complexity.

Under the drug-testing law, once an elected official was randomly selected
for drug testing, a notice of the selection would be delivered by a
commercial service. The official then would have 32 hours after
notification to take a urine test. If an elected official refused to show
up for a test, the Ethics Board could hold a public hearing and impose a
fine of up to $10,000, along with a public censure of the official.

The identity of an elected official who tested positive the first time
would be kept secret, according to the law. A second test would be
administered within six months.

This is no fine-tooth comb.

We hope that the state will not waste its time and money on appeals that
have little or no chance of success, on behalf of a law that does not matter.