JUDGE TURNS DOWN LOCKNEY MOTION FOR CASE REHEARING

LUBBOCK - A federal judge denied a motion by Lockney schools to
rehear the case involving its mandatory "suspicionless" drug-testing
program, attorneys said Friday.

Judge Sam R. Cummings with the U.S. District Court, Northern
District, ruled earlier this month that Lockney schools' drug-testing
program was unconstitutional. He ruled Friday that he did not want to
revisit the case, said Michael Linz, a Dallas attorney who filed the
original lawsuit.

"There's a strong probability that we appeal," said Lee Veness, a
Dallas lawyer representing Lockney Independent School District.

Lockney ISD wanted the case reheard based on its opinion that
Cummings misinterpreted the Vernonia case, which outlined what would
make a mandatory, suspicion-less drug testing program fair and
warranted under the Fourth Amendment, Veness said Friday.

"The U.S. Supreme Court rejected any notion that you had to have a
drug problem at the time within a specific group to have
suspicion-less drug testing program," Veness said. "The 'special
need' is only to deter, not eliminate, drug use."

The lawsuit was filed in March last year by the American Civil
Liberties Union after one parent, Larry Tannahill, refused to sign a
permission slip allowing his son Brady to participate in the
mandatory drug-testing program that started last year.

At the time, failure to participate constituted a positive test,
which would have subjected Brady to in-school suspension, drug
counseling, and being barred from extracurricular activities.

The ACLU called the drug-testing unconstitutional because it violated
the Fourth and Fourteenth amendments. It persisted, even as the
school district revised its policy, reducing punishment to drug
counseling for those who refused to take the test.

On March 1, Cummings accepted the ACLU's motion for summary judgment
in the case, saying the school district did not meet certain
standards to make its drug-testing policy lawful under the Fourth
Amendment.

The school district did not show a compelling state interest to
support its program because drug use in Lockney was low compared with
other schools, Cummings wrote. The school district's program also was
not "targeted to the special needs of . . . safety-sensitive job
functions," Cummings wrote.