COURT WRONG ON DRUG TESTING

If the goal of a recent Supreme Court ruling was to tear away at the Fourth
Amendment, it was successful. If the goal was to truly help children, it
failed miserably.

Ruling that any student participating in any extracurricular activity can
be subject to random drug testing will not make our campuses safer, nor
will it magically create an anti-drug sentiment in schools. As much as we'd
wish and hope that this ruling would be a solution to end drug use among
children, it's a far cry from an answer to the pervasive problem of kids
using drugs.

If only this complex dilemma were so easily solved.

Justice Clarence Thomas, in the majority opinion, wrote that testing is a
deterrent. He's right. Thanks to this court ruling, it's now a deterrent
for the most vulnerable adolescents to get involved in positive activities,
to try new pastimes. Kids, especially if they're experimenting with drugs,
are desperately searching to find their place in a society that often sends
conflicting, mixed-up, signals. Adolescents are looking for ways to connect
to the world around them. Extracurricular activities often act as the knot
that keeps them hanging on when they find themselves at the end of their
rope. Just untying that knot and letting them slip away is not good policy.
It's dumb law.

Kids will not risk humiliating themselves, getting in trouble with their
folks and school personnel, simply because they tried smoking a joint.
Instead, they'll do what kids are best at doing -- avoid the situation.
They'll simply skip getting involved in after-school activities. They won't
become the rare statistic of a student busted during random drug testing.
But they could well become part of the frightening numbers about drug use
and juvenile crime peaking from 3 to 6 p.m.

Lawyers in this case explained that students in the Tecumseh, Okla., school
dropped out of marching band and debate club after the random testing was
expanded to include those activities, but the reality of that impact wasn't
enough to sway the five justices who ruled in favor of the expanded
testing. The justices were correct to clarify that if random drug testing
is to occur, it's wrong to only test athletes. Indeed, the best thing to
come from this ruling is that it puts the chess club wizards, the talented
orators from the debate club and the thespians from the drama club in the
same league with the jocks.

But unfortunately, it's not a league that our schools should be pursuing.
Administrators and teachers are already challenged enough just trying to
educate children. The fact schools that offer extracurricular activities in
hopes of developing wholesome, productive youth is a bonus.

Asking them to assume the role of enforcer for what is truly a pervasive
societal failing is going too far. Almost 5 percent of schools nationwide
randomly test athletes, and 2 percent test extracurricular participants.
Beyond the cost of the tests, which run from $15 to $60 a pop, this
approach, if aggressively pursued, would put an excessive burden on an
already burdened system. The money would be better spent hiring an extra
counselor or hosting drug awareness programs.

Beyond the technical nightmare of implementing this ruling is the very real
issue of unreasonable searches. Almost half of the country's 14 million
high school students participate in extracurricular activities.

Now 7 million students are vulnerable to a search because we've yet to
figure out a way to keep our children from experimenting with, and using,
drugs. The impact of impressionable children assuming they must give up
certain freedoms because of the failings of others, sets a scary precedent.

Getting serious about illegal drug use on school campuses is a good thing.
Creating flawed, sweeping laws as a pretense to deal with the problem is not.