DRUGGIES BE GONE

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that government agencies can
aggressively evict drug users from public housing.

Without dissent, the court upheld Congress' "one-strike" law,
determining that government entities that in effect perform as
landlords - and receive federal funds - have the right to regulate
tenant behavior.

Senior citizens' groups had filed suit claiming that, in many cases,
innocent elderly residents of public housing were themselves
victimized by relatives who trafficked in drugs.

But, the court correctly noted, "It is not absurd that a local housing
authority may sometimes evict a tenant who had no knowledge of
drug-related activity."

The truth is that - especially in public housing - drug use and
trafficking invariably bring violence and social instability.

Evicting residents who have illegal drugs in their apartments -
knowingly or otherwise - creates a far safer environment for the
remaining tenants.

Including elderly tenants.

Why should law-abiding residents - especially children - in a given
public complex be put at risk because other residents engage in
illegal activity?

Or permit such activity to take place?

Or so lack control of those living in their apartment that they can't
keep illegal drugs out?

The issue is the safety of an entire housing complex versus the
inconvenience of a few.

How reassuring that the Supreme Court gave an unequivocal message
endorsing this common sense.