"Samantha L." wrote:
>
> I just learned recently that the Supremes upheld a public high school's
> right to conduct suspicionless random urinalysis tests on its athletes.
> (Verona v. ?) I think it was '95 or '96.
Vernonia School Dist. 47J v. Acton, ___ U.S. ___ (1995)
<http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/u10263.html>
It wasn't "suspicionless random urinalysis tests", it was a
blanket search of all athletes in order to play on the team.
> The lower court said NO due to the 4th ammendment right of citizens
> to to be free from searches without probable cause.
As they rightly should have....
> The Supremes' argument was that an athlete has a lower expectation of
> privacy than a non-athlete because he/she is accustomed to communal showers.
> How's that for an intelligent argument?
There were other issues argued, such as the students being
minors (non sui juris), and not possessing full legal
'protections'. The main argument, if I remember correctly
(it been about 4 years since I read these drug testing
opinions) was that the testing was allowed on the principle
of consideration -- a quid pro quo where extracurricular
activities, such as sports, were considered a privilege, and
in return for that privilege, they had 'play ball', so to
speak, and voluntarily acquiesce to the piss test.
IMO, since there is no consideration in this case, the
mandatory testing scheme will be struck down (see especially
O'Connor's dissent in Vernonia v. Acton, which was *well*
worth the read, especially when she broke out Cuddihy and
ranted about the history of the Fourth; Steven and Souter
joined in her dissent). It doesn't really matter anyway;
once they get out of 'publik skool' many will find that the
Fourth doesn't apply in contractual situations with
employers, and will eventually have the degrading experience
of peeing in a cup in order to earn their daily bread.
> A little town in Texas has recently instituted mandatory urinalysis of all
> students in grades 6-12. One dad is challenging it and has refused to allow
> his 12 year old son to be tested. The boy receives the same punishment from
> the school as if he tested positive, and will continue to receive escalating
> punishments for every month he continues to refuse, as if he tested positive
> each time.
Linda Minor posted an article from FindLaw on this case a
few weeks ago, (after she returned from her hiatus). You
might want to check the archives; it was worth the read.
Some further food for thought:
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to
protect liberty when the government's purposes are
beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel
invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The
greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment
by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."
Olmstead v. United States, 277 US 438 at 479, 72 L.Ed. 944,
48 S Ct 564, 66 ALR 376 (1928), Brandeis dissenting. Quoted
by Scalia, with whom Stevens joins, dissenting in Nat'l
Treas. Emp. Union v. Von Raab, 489 US 656, 103 L Ed 2d 685,
109 S Ct 1384 (1989). (Drug testing for Customs agents)
"There is no drug exception to the Constitution, any more
than there is a communism exception or an exception for
other real or imagined sources of domestic unrest. Coolidge
v. New Hampshire, 403 US 443, 455, 29 L Ed. 2d 564, 91 S.Ct.
2022 (1971)" Skinner v. Railway Labor Exec. Assn. (1989),
489 US 602 at 641; 103 L Ed. 2d 639, 109 S Ct. 1402.
Justices Marshall & Brennan dissenting. (Drug testing for
railway workers)
"There are few activities in our society more personal or
private than the passing of urine. Most people describe it
by euphemisms if they talk about it at all. It is a function
traditionally performed without public observation; indeed,
it's performance in public is generally prohibited by law as
well as social custom'." National Treasury Employees Union
v. Von Raab, 816 F 2d 170, 175 (1987).
--
IMO, piss testing without reasonable suspicion is degrading,
perverted, immoral, and in violation of all principles of
natural rights and justice. Further, roughly 5-10% of the
population have 'shy bladders' and find it difficult to pee
in public. It's especially difficult to pee in a cup when
there is someone breathing down our backs or, even worse,
gazing directly upon the family jewels until the cup is
full; so we are often subject to further harassment,
indignities, insults and abuse. And it's not as if we didn't
have to take a leak to begin with! It's just for some
strange reason as soon as the pants are dropped, and the cup
is raised, the urge vanishes. We're told to "drink more
water" (until we nearly puke), "think about baseball",
"picture the ocean, or a waterfall", "run in place", "run
some hot water on you hands", etc., and of course constantly
grilled on "why'd you come in here when you didn't have to
pee; you said you had to pee before we came in here". We're
forced into the degrading position of standing there half
nude being 'monitored' for 10, 20, 30 minutes or more, until
the point we have to go so bad that one's knees are buckling
and their teeth are chattering, and the oddly defiant
bladder finally caves. I assume some are lucky; are given a
cup and are allowed to pee alone. But because of the popular
phobocratic belief that "a druggy may cheat that way", it
seems it would not often be the case.
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid
matters
and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
