DRUG TESTS FOR STUDENTS

IN 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court got it right when it recognized that
students should be able to attend public high schools without fear of a
random search of their persons or belongings.

School administrators and teachers, the Court argued at that time, act as
extensions of the government and, thus, are bound by constitutional limits
on search and seizure.

Last week, however, the Court swept away some of the assurances students
won 17 years ago. In a troubling decision, it opened the door to random
drug testing of any student involved in extracurricular activities.

The opinion, which expands a 1995 judgment that allowed the testing of high
school athletes, held that a school's interest in correcting its drug
problem out-weighs any individual right to privacy.

What this means is that any student involved in any extracurricular
activity -- be it the chorus, the chess team or the Future Homemakers of
America -- could be subjected to a random drug test at any time.

School drug-testing programs such as the one in Oklahoma sanctioned by the
Court last week appear well-intended. Results are not reported to police or
prosecutors, but are used to steer troubled young people to counseling.

Nevertheless, the Fourth Amendment's ban on unreasonable searches is a
fundamental constitutional protection, and the Court seems on shaky ground
indeed in subjecting students to drug tests even in the total absence of
evidence of drug use.

The Court's majority apparently had second thoughts about the wisdom of its
earlier ruling that limited school drug tests to athletes. But that finding
was logical, since drug use among athletes carries serious risks of injuries.

Moreover, the ruling may have unintended results.

Proponents of drug testing say that students have a choice in whether to
participate in extracurricular clubs, for example. If students wish to
avoid drug tests, this argument goes, they can simply abstain from
after-school activities.

But that result may make it even more difficult to identify and help
students with drug problems. Moreover, it could punish a student who
withdraws from extracurricular activities by making him a weaker candidate
for admission to a competitive college.

No segment of the U.S. population should be asked to submit to random,
warrantless searches. After all, American courts have a history of striking
down such searches, even when they are part of an effort to prevent crime.

The Court's decision last week flies in the face of that history and sets a
troubling precedent for protecting the civil rights of students.