SCHOOL BOARD TO ASK THE U.S. SUPREME COURT
TO REINSTATE DRUG TESTING

The Anderson School Board's decision to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to
reinstate the school corporation's drug testing policy could mean legal
fees close to $60,000.

That figure assumes the justices would agree to hear the case.

Board member Irma Hampton Stewart, who is a lawyer, cast the only
dissenting vote as the board decided Tuesday night to appeal a U.S. 7th
Circuit Court of Appeals ruling to the Supreme Court.

The Court of Appeals has ruled unconstitutional a policy that requires a
drug test for students suspended three days or more for rule infractions.

Indiana Civil Liberties Union lawyer Ken Falk challenged the Anderson
policy after the Dec. 10, 1997, expulsion of Anderson High School freshman
James R. "Buddy" Willis II.

Buddy, now 16, was suspended for fighting with another student. Under a
policy adopted in August 1997, Buddy was ordered to take a drug test when
he returned to school Dec. 19.

Buddy refused the test and was barred from school for the rest of the
1997-98 school year while Falk and school lawyers fought about the
constitutionality of the policy.

The policy is modeled on one adopted in early 1997 at Carmel and is based
on a presumed link between misbehavior and drug use.

Anderson Schools attorney David Gotshall said he expected the board would
file its petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court by mid-January.

He estimated the petition will cost $15,000 to $18,000 in legal and filing
costs. If the justices decide to hear the case, Anderson's legal costs
could soar by an additional $40,000, he said.

"Although we have no assurances," Gotshall said, "Carmel has indicated a
willingness to consider helping with legal costs. We're hopeful they will
participate."

"We figured this was going to happen," said Buddy's father, James R.
"Randy" Willis. "We thought they would appeal. . . . We welcome it. It
takes four justices to say, 'Yes, we want to hear it.' I don't think that
will happen, but even if it does, I think we're going to win."

Falk contends the link between breaking school rules and student drug use
is not strong enough to override Fourth Amendment constitutional guarantees
against unreasonable search.

A U.S. District Court judge in Indianapolis had disagreed. But a panel of
three appeals court judges subsequently agreed with Falk's argument.

Since the ruling, Carmel and several other central Indiana school districts
have withdrawn or modified their versions of the policy.

Checked-by: derek rea