ATTORNEYS TO TAKE DRUG TEST CASE BACK TO U.S. SUPREME COURT

CHARLESTON -- A decade-old lawsuit over giving police the results of
hospital drug tests on pregnant women is expected to go to the nation's
highest court a second time.

This past Friday, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va.,
refused to reconsider its ruling that some of the plaintiffs did not know
they were being tested for cocaine or consent to such tests at the Medical
University of South Carolina.

The defendants will appeal that to the U.S. Supreme Court, said Bobby Hood,
an attorney representing the state.

The Supreme Court already has ruled the tests violated Fourth Amendment
protections against unreasonable search and seizure. If the high court
refuses to hear or rejects the new appeal, the case would return to
Charleston where a jury would weigh damages, said Susan Dunn, an attorney
for the plaintiffs.

In 1993, 10 women sued MUSC and school officials, the city of Charleston
and local law enforcement officials, saying the testing was an
unconstitutional search. The testing policy, since dropped, was designed to
keep mothers from harming their unborn babies with cocaine.

In 1997, a federal jury in Charleston rejected the women's claim and, two
years later, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the drug tests,
saying the law allows searches without a warrant when the government shows
a special need.

The appeals judges said the policy was a valid effort to reduce crack
cocaine use by pregnant woman.

Police arrested about 30 maternity patients and charged them under the
state's child endangerment law while the policy was in effect.

But the U.S. Supreme Court later reversed the appeals court, ruling the
testing violated the Constitution. The justices returned the case to the
lower courts and, last October, the appeals court ruled that eight
plaintiffs did not consent to the tests.

Dunn estimated the damage request in the case could be around $300,000.

The attorneys' fees, however, could be substantially more. Under federal
law when the case was filed, defendants are liable for plaintiffs'
attorneys' fees if a constitutional violation is found, she said.

Dunn would not estimate what the request might be, but said the case is
similar in form to the legal fight over admitting women to The Citadel.

There, the defendants were ordered to pay $4.5 million in attorney fees for
the plaintiffs.

The drug testing case, she said, has gone on longer -- for 10 years now --
and has already been to the U.S. Supreme Court once and the 4th Circuit twice.