RIGHTS INFRINGED BY POLICY

Your editorial (A-J, 8-24) endorsing the Lockney schools' revised
drug-testing policy makes arguments that appear to me to be unfounded and
disregards the fact that constitutional rights are infringed by this policy.

Certainly, participants in extracurricular activities must meet relevant
requirements, but not at the expense of their Fourth Amendment right to be
free from unreasonable searches -- those without probable cause.

This right means that an individual's observed behavior, not a random and
invasive test, must first provide probable grounds for suspecting drug use.
Participation in athletics may be an exception to this, because drug use
may have an immediate effect on athletes' health or safety or on the
results of an athletic contest. But this is not generally true of
extracurricular participation.

Your claim that there is no difference between the legality of school drug
testing for extracurricular activities and that of testing required in the
private work place is erroneous. The latter is based on public carrier
safety regulations, on a contract with a union, or on the presumed right of
the private employer to hire and fire at will, derived from the right to
control his/her property. Public schools do not have this right regarding
their employees or their students; they must obey the Fourth Amendment.

You have admirably defended First Amendment rights regarding freedom of
information. Why not defend all of the Bill of Rights?

B.H. NEWCOMB

President, Lubbock Chapter, ACLU, Lubbock