AS OTHERS SAY IT ...

The Supreme Court recently gave its approval to random drug testing of
public high school students involved in extracurricular activities. By a
vote of 5-to-4, the court ruled that local school officials can require
drug tests of students in the band or on the debate team.

If we really believe demanding urine samples from the chess club will stop
drug use, why not test all students? Why just the ones participating most
fully in school life?

Why not? Because mandatory drug testing for all students begins to sound as
invasive, excessive and unnecessary as it is.

The case the high court heard was brought by Lindsey Earls, a former
Tecumseh (Okla.) High School student who is now an undergraduate at
Dartmouth College. She said her constitutional rights were violated when,
in order to join a competitive singing group, teachers required her to
urinate into a cup while they listened nearby to prevent cheating.

When tight budgets mean school districts are fighting for the very
existence of extracurricular activities not to mention some academic
programs, it is not the time to introduce costly measures aimed in the
wrong direction: at kids who are involved in wholesome activities.

In fact, one of the ways experts including the Partnership for a Drug- Free
America (the this-is-your-brain-on-drugs people) cite over and over as a
way to keep kids away from drugs is to involve them in adult-supervised
activities after school.

Children are not adults. Still, they are not undeserving of some of the
rights afforded to adults under the Constitution, including an expectation
of some privacy and protection from unreasonable searches.