Justices Uphold Drug Tests In Schools

Support For Random Screening of Students Expands Earlier Ruling

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the widespread use of
random drug testing of public school students in a significant expansion of
an earlier ruling that endorsed drug testing for student athletes.

The 5-4 decision upheld a program in a rural Oklahoma district that
required students engaged in "competitive" extracurricular activities, a
category that includes the future homemakers' club, the cheerleading squad
and the choir, to submit to random drug testing.

In emphasizing the "custodial responsibilities" of a public school system
toward its students, rather than the details of how the program was
organized, the majority opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas appeared to
encompass random drug testing of an entire student population.

But one member of the majority, Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who wrote a
concurring opinion while also signing Thomas', said it was significant that
the program in the Tecumseh, Okla., school district "preserves an option
for a conscientious objector" by limiting the scope to students in
extracurricular activities.

Students who are found to be using drugs at Tecumseh High School are barred
from their activities and referred for counseling, but are not otherwise
disciplined or reported to the police. The policy was challenged by Lindsay
Earls, an honor student active in several activities who is now attending
Dartmouth College.

Thursday's decision was joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and
Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy.

The dissenters were Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, John Paul Stevens, David
H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

In another major decision, the court ruled 5-4 that judicial candidates may
talk more freely about issues like abortion and school prayer while
campaigning.

The high court, in throwing out limits in Minnesota, said the rules impose
an unconstitutional gag order and that candidates for any office, including
a judgeship, cannot be barred from discussing issues.

The free-speech ruling changes the political landscape just as 33 states
are getting ready for elections. It provoked criticism among law groups,
which called on candidates to limit their campaigning anyway lest the
integrity of the judiciary be harmed.

"We have never allowed the government to prohibit candidates from
communicating relevant information to voters during an election," said
Scalia, writing for the majority.

"I do not agree with the court's 'an election is an election' approach,"
Ginsburg said in dissenting. "Judges are not political actors, and the
First Amendment does not require that they be treated as politicians simply
because they are elected."

O'Connor joined Scalia in overturning the rules, along with Rehnquist,
Kennedy and Thomas.

Besides Ginsburg, dissenting were Stevens, Souter and Breyer.

The high court also outlawed, in a 6-3 ruling, the Alabama prison practice
of chaining disruptive inmates to outdoor "hitching posts," calling it
cruel and unusual punishment.