HIGH COURT TO RULE ON EXPANSION OF PUPIL DRUG TESTING

Drug Tests In Schools Under Siege

WASHINGTON -- Choked with emotion, Norwalk, Conn., resident Virginia Katz
pushed her way through a throng of reporters outside the U.S. Supreme Court
and held up a photograph of her son, Ian, who died of a heroin overdose.

"Ian, he was your age. You would have liked him," Katz told Lindsey Earls,
a 19-year-old Dartmouth College student from Tecumseh, Okla., whose legal
challenge to high school drug testing was argued before the court Tuesday
morning.

Katz was named the Connecticut Post's 2000 Woman of the Year, largely for
her efforts to combat drug and alcohol abuse among teens.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing Earls, claims
that a Tecumseh school board policy to subject students participating in
extracurricular activities to random drug tests violates the Fourth
Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure.

"Couldn't you give up a little bit of your privacy so this will not happen
to other parents?" Katz asked Earls.

Earls, who appeared startled by the confrontation, did not reply, but moved
around Katz toward a stand of microphones to respond to questions from
reporters. Although she sympathized with Katz's loss, Earls said later she
did not view her school's drug testing policy as the answer to teen-age
drug abuse.

"I don't feel that the drug testing policy was a life-or-death issue. The
kids in choir and on the academic team weren't using drugs," Earls said.
"Maybe if he [Ian] had been in choir it might have helped him."

Earls was a member of Tecumseh's show choir, marching band and academic
team. She was subjected to a urinalysis test but was found drug free.

"It was an invasion of my privacy," Earls said.

In taking up Earls' case, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to issue an
opinion this summer that could broaden a landmark 1995 ruling in favor of
drug screening for high school athletes to include any student.

Connecticut school boards do not appear to have embraced drug testing for
athletes or other students, but that could change if perceived
constitutional barriers are lifted. Katz said she hopes to rally support
for such a program in the future.

Katz established the non-profit Courage to Speak Foundation in 1997 and has
since delivered drug-prevention presentations to more than 160 groups in
Connecticut. Her son, Ian, died of a heroin overdose on Sept. 10, 1996, at
age 20.

"I truly believe this [school drug testing] will help parents," Katz said.
"Parents do not believe their children are using drugs. They are very nave
and many times believe what their children say. But a child using drugs
will not be truthful. This is the reality of it."

Katz believes that her son would have steered clear of drugs if there had
been drug testing in his school because he would have wanted to remain on
the lacrosse team. Moreover, she said, it would provide a ready answer to
students facing peer pressure to experiment with drugs.

Katz said she felt compelled to confront Earls to let her know that she
would have welcomed learning that her son was using drugs while in high school.

"I just wanted to ask her if she couldn't give up her ACLU stand -- give up
a little bit of her privacy -- so that this wouldn't happen to other
parents," Katz said.

David and Lori Earls, Lindsey's parents, said they were offended by the
school policy for two reasons. They felt seeing to their child's well-being
is their job and that the policy focused on students least likely to be
abusing drugs.

"I was very offended that this group, the choir, would be chosen. They were
picking on the wrong kids," Lori Earls said.

Graham Boyd, director of ACLU's National Drug Policy Litigation Project in
New Haven, Conn., who represented Earls, told the high court there was no
compelling evidence of a drug problem in the high school. He also argued
that, unlike athletes, students in choir or academic clubs do not face a
serious risk of injury from mixing drugs with those activities.

Linda Meoli, a lawyer for the school district, argued that the drug tests
were a deterrent and that any student who strongly objected to the
urinalysis could simply choose not to participate in an extracurricular
activity.

In 1995, the Supreme Court split 6 to 3 in favor of aIlowing drug testing
of school athletes. Not all of the justices who voted in favor are likely
to vote to broaden the policy to include students participating in other
extracurricular activities.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who voted with the majority in 1995, said
Tuesday that in Tecumseh High School there did not appear to be much
evidence of a drug problem and even less among those students participating
in extracurricular activities.

But Justice Antonin Scalia questioned why he should not trust the local
school board to decide when they believe a drug problem rises to the point
where they vote to "use this Draconian measure."