Welcome to the Student Drug Testing Coalition web site. The site is maintained to provide technical resources, materials and information about student drug testing programs—a proven deterrent to student drug use—and contains reports on current research and student drug use data; student-drug testing court case rulings; summaries of school policies; links to other resources, and more.
Welfare drug testing, Morality, and the Law, Garland Press, Moreover, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that drug testing programs are constitutionally permissible within both the public and the private sectors.
It appears mandatory drug testing is a permanent fixture of American corporate life. As the Court held in Adair v.
United States U.
Employers could establish any requirements they wished for prospective and current employees. Not only could they decline to hire employees who will refuse drug tests, they could likewise decline to hire people with characteristics, beliefs, or behavior they dislike.
Employees must endure these requirements or seek employment elsewhere. However, since most people have limited job opportunities, they will be forced to "accept" these requirements, no matter how objectionable.
Courts and legislatures have since recognized the abuses this principle could engender. During the last thirty years they have placed numerous constraints on the right of employers. Later court decisions held that discrimination based on sex and religion were likewise prohibited.
Nonetheless, elements of the "employment at will" principle are alive and well. In siding with the employer the court said: If the employee continues working with the knowledge of the changes, he has accepted the changes as a matter of law. Minco Technology Labs, Inc.
Supreme Court cases discussed later. Employers can make extensive demands on employees, simply because it is their pleasure. Mandatory drug testing is also underwritten by potent political considerations.
The public is concerned about the growing use of illegal drugs. The Supreme Court specifically noted this concern in upholding the mandatory testing of Customs Service employees. The use of illegal narcotics, they said, is "one of the greatest problems affecting the health and welfare of our population.
The public wants drug use stopped; and they are willing to use virtually any means to achieve that result. Accordingly, in upholding testing programs, the Supreme Court recognized that testing programs involve invasions of privacy which cannot be constitutionally ignored.
It is not evident, however, that the Fourth Amendment is directly relevant to this issue. In fact, by focusing exclusively on this amendment, the courts have made the case for mandatory drug testing too easy. The primary functions of the Fourth are to insure that governmental agents cannot criminally prosecute someone using evidence obtained "unreasonably," and that neither people nor their property can be examined without warning, unless an independent magistrate determines an unannounced search is warranted.
Even when the federal government is the employer as in National Treasury, discussed laterit demands qua employer -- not qua government agent -- that employees be tested.
Second, test results are not made available to law enforcement officials, and, hence, cannot be grounds for criminal prosecution. Third, since employees know when they accept certain jobs that they will be tested, then they will be searched only after appropriate warning.
In short, such test are not unconstitutional searches under the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. At least that is what the Court ruled. I am inclined to agree. However, even if the prohibition against unreasonable searches is not violated by drug testing, that does not establish that testing is morally or legally permissible.
These moral limits are also Constitutional limits -- albeit not ones the Court majority recognized in any of the cases cited.Claim: Various states have passed laws requiring that public assistance recipients pass a drug testing program.
“Kentucky just passed a great law. To be eligible for food stamps, medicaid, or. Courts agree: Blanket drug testing with no individualized reason for suspicion is unconstitutional. But politicians and other leaders continue to try to implement these programs to score political points at the expense of some of the nation’s most vulnerable communities.
Last week, President Trump signed a bill revoking an Obama-era rule limiting drug testing for Americans who receive unemployment benefits. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, meanwhile, is reportedly. TALLAHASSEE — Required drug tests for people seeking welfare benefits ended up costing taxpayers more than it saved and failed to curb the number of prospective applicants, data used against the.
Does Drug Testing Welfare Applicants Work? Lawmakers who push these bills claim that they will cut down on costs by rooting out drug abusers while also helping to refer those users to treatment.
Drug Testing Welfare Recipients Is A Popular New Policy That Cost States Millions. Here Are The Results.