WANT TO SING AT SCHOOL? LET'S TEST YOUR URINE FIRST

OK, so the Supreme Court of the United States is going to decide whether
potential sopranos in the high schools have to not only hit that F-sharp
but also pass a urine test for drug use.

Yikes! Even in the most restrictive, authoritarian households, drug testing
comes only after parents suspect their kid is using. If ever there were a
case of yelling before you're hit, this is it.

The case involves the Tecumseh, Okla., school district, which in 1998
adopted a student activities drug-testing policy that required any student
who wanted to participate in an extracurricular activity at the high school
to submit to a drug test. Lindsay Earls, who wanted to join the marching
band and the chorus, filed a complaint claiming the policy violated her
Fourth Amendment right to be free from warrantless searches. A U.S.
district court for Oklahoma agreed with the school district; a U.S. circuit
court of appeals agreed with the student, setting the Supreme Court action.

The odd thing is that lawyers for the school district filed documents that
said the district didn't have a drug problem. The school's drug testing
turned up only three cases out of 505 tests.

Now I may be wrong, but I thought that students who participated in
extracurricular activities were less likely to do a lot of things: smoke,
drink, have sex, get involved in gang violence, and, yes, use drugs.
Testing most of these kids is not a deterrent to drug use - more than
likely, they're not using drugs. So why assume that kids are guilty? Why
presume drug use? Yes, good kids do stupid things. But to presume that all
kids do stupid things is stupid.

I think it's funny that the Tecumseh school board wants to go after the
kids who are doing the right thing, the things parents would want their
children to participate in. They're going after the ones who want to have
fun, learn something, be active, and add to the quality of school life.

As far as I can tell, they are not testing the kids they suspect of smoking
pot behind the school. Maybe it's a sterotype, but the kids trying out for
Latin club are not prone to drug use. Instead, all you chess-club wannabes,
grab a cup and drop your drawers!

If you're going to test the cheerleading squad, the audio-visual club, the
Future Homemakers of America, and the yearbook staff, why not go after the
known potheads, too? In essence, why not test every high school student?

Can't you see it? Kids lined up in front of the school bathrooms, paper
cups in hand?

As ludicrous as it sounds, we may be heading that way if the Supreme Court
sides with the Tecumseh school board. The court seems divided in its
thinking: Justice Scalia seems to think testing everyone and his cousin is
in order to fight a national high school drug problem (again, even though
Tecumseh school officials concede that they don't have a drug problem),
while Justices O'Connor and Souter seem to think the scope of the policy is
too broad.

If the court backs the school district, the presumption of guilt will
outweigh personal freedoms in people not old enough to vote.

But don't question us, kids. We adults know best.