Board of education v earls

Indeed, the success of a non-athletic team-such as Tecumseh's academic team, which was state champion in andibid. In those circumstances, the Court stated, "[i]t is sufficient that the Government have a compelling interest in preventing an otherwise pervasive societal problem from spreading to the particular context.

Malignant Neglect 4 students "whose friends use illicit drugs are more than 10 times likelier to use illicit drugs than those whose friends do not". At the time of their suit, both respondents attended Tecumseh High School.

That analysis is flawed on several different levels and, if embraced by the Court, would seriously undercut local efforts to address the pervasive national problem posed by drugs. Activities of the kind plaintiff-respondent Lindsay Earls pursued--choir, show choir, marching band, and academic team--afford opportunities to gain self-assurance, to "come to know faculty members in a less formal setting than the typical classroom," and to acquire "positive social supports and networks [that] play a critical role in periods of heightened stress.

The school setting of this case necessarily affects the legitimate expectations of privacy. Under the Policy, students are required to take a drug test before participating in an extracurricular activity, must submit to random drug testing while participating in that activity, and must agree to be tested at any time upon reasonable suspicion.

As both courts recognized below, "like athletes, participants in other extracurricular activities have a somewhat lesser privacy expectation than other students.

After a February school board meeting at which a parent admitted her own child's drug use, J. A program of individualized suspicion might unfairly target members of unpopular groups.

June 27, The Student Activities Drug Testing Policy Policy adopted by the Tecumseh, Oklahoma, School District School District requires all middle and high school students to consent to urinalysis testing for drugs in order to participate in any extracurricular activity.

Board of Education v. Earls - Amicus (Merits)

During tests, students are accompanied into a restroom by an adult monitor of the same sex and asked to provide a urine sample from behind a "closed stall.

The Court observed, however, that such concern would be ameliorated if students were permitted to provide such information "in a confidential manner-for example, in a sealed envelope delivered to the testing lab.

Whatever the risk of injury from competing under the influence of drugs, the school district has a strong interest in seeing that those who represent Tecumseh High are not an "embarrassment" to the school and community, not to mention themselves.

The student may continue to participate in the activity if within five days of the meeting the student shows proof of receiving drug counseling and submits to a second drug test in two weeks. For the very reason that schools cannot offer a program of competitive athletics without intimately affecting the privacy of students, Vernonia reasonably analogized school athletes to "adults who choose to participate in a closely regulated industry.

Some of these clubs and activities require occasional off-campus travel and communal undress. We therefore conclude that the students affected by this Policy have a limited expectation of privacy.

There is, in short, no basis for adopting a constitutional dividing line based on whether a student chooses to participate in an interscholastic activity that is athletic, or one that is non-athletic. The school district in this case adopted its drug-testing policy only after it had tried other anti-drug measures and had held community meetings to receive input on its proposed policy.

Here, as in Vernonia, "[t]hat the nature of the concern is important-indeed, perhaps compelling-can hardly be doubted. They subject themselves to additional requirements, but they do so in order to take full advantage of the education offered them.

The court of appeals characterized the record of "actual drug use" in this case as "minimal," Pet. Vernonia initiated its drug testing policy in response to an alarming situation: In Vernonia, this Court characterized the degree of intrusion involved in testing as "negligible" and "not significant.

Furthermore, this Court has not required a particularized or pervasive drug problem before allowing the government to conduct suspicionless drug testing. In addition, unlike Vernonia, the policy here expressly requires that information concerning prescription medications remain confidential.

A drug dog found marijuana cigarettes near the school parking lot. Brief for Respondents Neither students nor schools would benefit from such a microscopic approach to the "special needs" analysis of Vernonia.

Observing that students produce urine samples in a bathroom stall with a coach or teacher outside, Vernonia typed the privacy interests compromised by the process of obtaining samples "negligible.

In that regard, the record in Vernonia by no means establishes a constitutional floor for justifying a student drug-testing policy. Students may appeal test results to the superintendent and continue to participate in OSSAA activities.

Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls

School counselors have reported several instances of drug use among band members, and other incidents of drug use among students in vocal. Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls: Board of Education of Independent School District No.

92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on June 27,ruled (5–4) that suspicionless drug testing of students participating in competitive extracurricular. The Supreme Court expanded schools' ability to conduct drug tests in Board of Education v. Earls, U.S. (). The case began when the school board in Tecumseh, Oklahoma developed a policy to test all students in extracurricular activities.

Board of Education v. Earls - Amicus (Merits)

High school student Lindsay Earls and her family, with the legal backing of the American Civil. board of education of independent school district no.

92 of pottawatomie county et al. v. earls et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the tenth circuit. no. 01— argued march 19, –decided june 27, Defendant Board of Education of Tecumseh Public School District, Independent School District No.

92 of Pottawatomie County, is responsible for issuing, implementing, and enforcing the Student Activities Drug Testing Policy, which bars students from certain activities for which they are otherwise eligible unless they submit to testing of their.

Petitioners (collectively, the "school district") are a public school district in Tecumseh and its governing board of education. The school district administers Tecumseh High School, which has about students in grades 9 through 12, as well as a middle school and elementary schools.

Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls

board of education of independent school district no. 92 of pottawatomie county et al. v. earls et al.

BOARD OF ED. OF INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST.NO. 92 OF POTTAWATOMIE CTY. v. EARLS

certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the tenth circuit. no. 01— argued march 19, –decided june 27,

Board of education v earls
Rated 4/5 based on 43 review
Board of Education v. Earls - Wikipedia