W. TEXAS DISTRICT EXPECTS RULING THIS FALL ON DRUG-TESTING POLICY

Revised version bans students who don't consent to tests from school
activities

LOCKNEY, Texas - School officials were told at a Thursday board meeting that
they may be able to expect a ruling in October or early November on the
constitutionality of Lockney's mandatory drug-testing policy.

Meanwhile, the drug policy remains in force in this small West Texas
community's schools, although a revised version suspends students who fail
to consent to the tests from extracurricular activities rather than
requiring a full suspension from school and mandatory drug counseling.

The revisions don't sit well with the attorneys of Larry Tannahill, who sued
the board on his son's behalf after the policy went into effect in February,
arguing that the original policy violates 12-year-old Brady Tannahill's
constitutional rights.

"They are moving inches, and they need to move miles," said Mr. Tannahill's
Lubbock attorney, Jeff Conner. "The policy still presumes that the kids are
guilty until they are proven innocent."

Attorneys for the school district say they have requested a written response
from Mr. Tannahill on the revisions made July 13. Mr. Tannahill's attorneys
say they have seen no request for a response to the changes.

Mr. Tannahill's son was the sole holdout when the policy was implemented.
Mr. Tannahill refused to sign a consent form, saying the policy violated his
son's rights.

For not agreeing to the original policy, Brady was punished as if he had
tested positive for drugs: a 21-day suspension from extracurricular
activities, at least three days' in-school suspension and three sessions of
substance abuse counseling.

Both parties agreed in March to not follow through with the punishment until
the lawsuit is settled.

Lockney Superintendent Raymond Lusk said the board had hoped the revisions
to the policy would be viewed as a compromise.

"Sometimes you implement a policy and look back at it and say this should
have been done this way," he said. "The purpose of this is to settle this
[issue] because we have a lot more important things to do as far as the
educational process."

Mr. Conner says the revised version of the policy isn't any more
constitutional than the first. It still targets every student in the seventh
through 12th grade. The original policy required those in the sixth through
12th grade to participate.

"A reasonable resolution would be to do what the Constitution of the United
States requires, which would be to have some suspicion that a student is
using drugs before requiring them to submit to a drug test," Mr. Conner
said.

In March, the ACLU asked the board to eliminate or at least refine its
policy to comply with the Constitution. The board decided not to act on the
motion, upholding its original policy and denying Mr. Tannahill's appeal of
his son's punishment for not consenting to the drug test.

Many of those in attendance at the March meeting spoke out in support of the
policy. They wore red and white shirts that stated, "We asked for it, LISD
delivered it, We appreciate it."

Wayland Baptist University business professor and Lockney parent Bobby Hall
was among those wearing shirts in support of the policy. Despite his support
of the original policy, he thinks the board legally made the right decision
to revise it.

"I'm sure that many people, including those on the school board, are
disappointed to change the policy," Dr. Hall said last week. "But sometimes
you must do things you don't necessarily want to do, and in this case it
would not be prudent to ignore legal counsel."