JUSTICES RULE RANDOM DRUG TESTS, SAFETY ABOVE PRIVACY RIGHTS

For many, it boils down to how far Americans are willing to go in the war
on drugs. Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a ruling allowing public
schools to randomly drug test students involved in extracurricular
activities. While no random drug testing currently takes place for students
in Brevard County, Sebastian River High in Indian River County has tested
athletes for years. Osceola County also tests.

The court's 5-4 decision stressed the need for safety in schools over a
student's right to privacy. The court stopped short of allowing random
tests for any student, but several justices have indicated they are
interested in answering that question at some point.

"We find that testing students who participate in extracurricular
activities is a reasonably effective means of addressing the school
district's legitimate concerns in preventing, deterring and detecting drug
use," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority, which also included
Chief Justice William Rehnquist and justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony
Kennedy and Stephen Breyer.

Breyer, who provided the crucial fifth vote for the ruling, wrote
separately to say he hopes the testing reduces peer pressure. "It offers
the adolescent a nonthreatening reason to decline his friend's drug-use
invitations, namely that he intends to play baseball, participate in
debate, join the band or engage in any one of a half-dozen useful,
interesting and important activities," he wrote.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined by justices John Paul Stevens, Sandra
Day O'Connor and David Souter, said extracurricular activities should not
be discouraged. They "serve students of all manner: the modest and shy
along with the bold and uninhibited," Ginsburg wrote.

Tom McIntyre, Melbourne High School principal and a former football coach,
did not agree with the idea of targeting a group of kids for testing, even
though participation is wide in after-school activities such as athletics,
band, theater and clubs.

"Drug use isn't limited to extra-curricular activities. If they want to
make a bold statement, they would random test the entire campus," he said.
"I'm concerned about taking a group of kids who do more rather than less
for the school and singling them out."

He added that those involved in extracurricular activities know there are
certain requirements that go along, such as a physical and maintaining a
certain grade-point average.

"If they choose not to meet those requirements, they don't play," McIntyre
said. "It would be the same with drug testing."

The difference between random testing vs. privacy in a school sometimes
requires a different set of standards than in an adult world.

"Courts are periodically called upon to weigh two very important questions
against each other," said Paul Gougelman, city attorney for the city of
Melbourne. "The first part is what are we going to do to win the war
against drug abuse? We have to get tough and that is a good community goal.
On the other hand, we are slowly but surely chipping away at protections
against government intrusion."

Tests can be administered without any suspicion of drug abuse and is not
limited to athletes. Previously, testing was only limited to
student-athletes. The court echoed the sentiments of the Bush
administration whose lawyers argued that a school could possibly test all
of its students without violating privacy rights.

Some locally welcomed the ruling.

Chuck Goldfarb, Cocoa High athletic director and former baseball coach,
said the ruling might sway kids from taking drugs at all.

"It's long overdue," he said. "Just the thought of being drug tested will
be a major deterrent to kids."

But Gougelman warned that the court ruling might have long-lasting
implications.

"People need to consider that regardless of how you may feel, this ruling
will no doubt create precedence that will be relied upon by the courts in
the future," he said, "and may chop further away our protections against
government."

Brevard County school officials stepped cautiously around the issue.

"This is clearly a school community issue," Superintendent Richard DiPatri
said. "We will look at the Supreme Court's ruling and weigh the advantages
and disadvantages. Then, the School Board will have to make a determination
if random drug testing is in the best interest of our students."

State Representative Mitch Needelman, R-Melbourne, said that schools
"expect their students to be drug-free, and I certainly support that
concept." He added that being able to participate in any extracurricular
activity is a privilege and that students must meet certain expectations in
order to have that privilege.

"Most of the students involved with extracurricular activities...are looked
upon as leaders and it's important that leaders live up to a high
standard," he said.

The court ruled against a former Oklahoma high school honor student who
competed on an academic quiz team and sang in the choir. Lindsay Earls, a
self-described "goody two-shoes," tested negative but sued over what she
called a humiliating and accusatory policy.

The Pottawatomie County school system had considered testing all students.
Instead, it settled for testing only those involved in extracurricular
activities on the theory that by voluntarily representing the school, those
students had a lower expectation of privacy than did students at large.