Drug Testing Case Study

School Athlete Drug Testing

In the case of the Roanoke County Schools, the schools should be allowed to test student athletes for drugs. This is because the drug tests are not a violation of the students’ 4th Amendment privacy rights. Since this case involves students in a school, different rules apply. Drug testing should also be allowed because the safety of the other student athletes could be threatened if one of them is on drugs. This case is important to the common good because it shows that although defending individual rights is important, occasionally rights must be given up for the safety of all. Court precedents in the cases of Vernonia School District v. Acton (1995) and New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) support this claim. Is it Constitutional

T.L.O. (1985). Schools have a right to drug test student athletes because student’s rights must be balanced with safety. This case involved a student that was caught smoking in a school bathroom by a teacher. Her purse was searched by the principal and it was discovered that she possessed marijuana. The student claimed the search had been an invasion to her right of privacy and appealed the conviction. The Supreme Court sided with the school district. The court noticed that students must be able to learn at school, so anything disrupting the learning environment must be stopped, despite students still having privacy rights. “Students have ‘legitimate expectations of privacy,’ the Court said, but that must be balanced with the school's responsibility for ‘maintaining an environment in which learning can take place’” This is similar to the Roanoke County schools case because both are faced with balancing student privacy rights and maintaining a safe school environment where students can learn. This court case supports the claim that drug testing should be allowed because it is shown that is is necessary for student privacy rights to be balanced with student safety. This is similar to the Roanoke County Schools case because although student privacy rights are being restricted, the safety of the other student athletes is in danger so the drug tests should

The main reason for this is that at school, different rules apply to students. Some of these can lessen their rights to privacy. In addition to this, the safety of the student body is more important than full privacy rights at school. Drug testing student athletes is not a violation of the 4th Amendment because school rules permit limitations on the rights that students have. If we follow this policy, it is better for the common good because the Roanoke County Schools case shows that sometimes rights must be given up to obtain safety. If people understand this, they can avoid dangerous situations without unnecessary arguments concerning rights. It is clear from the case of Vernonia School District v. Acton (1995) that student privacy rights can be constrained by school rules. Also, the case of New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) proves that schools must balance student rights with safety, which is why drug testing should be allowed in school sports. When we ask if it’s Constitutional to limit students’ privacy rights, or if students always have full rights even if it makes the environment less safe it is clear what the answer is. It is evident that it is within the Constitution to lessen students’ privacy rights on campus to keep students