STUDENT RIGHTS GET TRASHED

If the 97-pound weakling freshman bulks up to 250 pounds by his sophomore
year and starts tossing barbells around the weight room, test him for
steroids. If the head cheerleader's pupils are the size of saucers, by all
means give her a drug test. But a policy of making every student who
participates in extra-curricular activities subject to random drug tests
strikes us as a violation of their civil rights - and stupid to boot.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week ruled against a former Oklahoma high
school honor student who tested negative for drugs but sued over what she
said was a humiliating, accusatory policy. Her crime? Singing in the school
choir and competing on an academic quiz team. "We find that testing
students who participate in extracurricular activities is a reasonably
effective means of addressing the school district's legitimate concerns in
preventing, deterring and detecting drug use," Justice Clarence Thomas
wrote for the majority in the 5-4 decision.

We agree with dissenting Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who said the program
the court upheld was unreasonable, capricious and perverse. Why? Because
the only students in American public schools not potentially subject to
random drug testing are those who don't participate in extracurricular
activities. That's stupid.

Some school districts jumped on this slippery slope years ago when they
required drug-testing for athletes on grounds they could hurt themselves or
others if they played or practiced while under the influence of drugs or
alcohol. That makes sense. It's the same rationale police departments and
trucking firms follow when they conduct random drug tests of employees.

But to force a youth to urinate in a bottle just because he or she wants to
play the clarinet in the school band or join the chess club amounts to an
unreasonable search and seizure, in our opinion.