Vernonia School District V. Acton
Essay Preview: Vernonia School District V. Acton
Report this essay
On June 26, 1995, the Supreme Court decided on the case Vernonia School District v. Acton as to whether or not random drug testing of high school athletes violated the reasonable search and seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment. During the 1980s and 1990s there was a large increase in drug use. The courts decision was a strong interpretation of the Fourth Amendment and the right decision upon drug testing high school athletes.
Between 1985 and 1989 the Vernonia School District began to see a marked increase in disciplinary problems, drug use by students, athletic injuries, use of drugs by athletes and a student body preoccupation with the drug culture. The school district adopted a policy requiring students who participated in interscholastic athletics to sign a consent of both routine and random drug testing.
In the fall of 1991, respondent James Acton, then a seventh-grader, signed up to play football at one of the Districts grade schools. He was denied participation because he and his parents refused to sign the testing consent forms. The Actons filled suit on the grounds that it violated the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The federal district court ruled in the school districts favor, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision, stating that although the district had laid the foundation for a drug policy, the interest was not so compelling as to justify a random testing program. The time between the 1980s and 1990s America saw a dramatic increase in drug use which spread through nearly every community in the nation. Drugs had not previously been a major problem in Vernonia schools. In the mid-to-late 1980s, however, teachers and administrators observed an increase in drug use. Students began to speak out about their attraction to the drug culture, and boasted that there was nothing the school could do about it.
The Supreme Court had to decide on the question of, does random drug testing of high school athletes violate the reasonable search and seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment? According to the Fourth Amendment, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” School officials could collect a urine sample from any athlete whether or not that athlete was suspected of drug use at any time during the season. Vernonia had started drug tests to cut down on what school officials viewed as widespread drug use among students. James himself, a good student, had never been suspected of using illegal drugs. Not only did the Actons not sign the permission slip, they sued the school district, charging that random drug testing violated students rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Fourth Amendment prohibits government from conducting unreasonable searches. The Actons charged that Vernonias policy of requiring random urine samples of student athletes was unreasonable because it searched, or invaded, the bodies of all athletes, including those who had never been suspected of drug use.
The Supreme Court compared other court decisions involving the Fourth Amendment to decide whether it violated athletes rights. In 1989 the courts decision on Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Assoc., The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) recognizing the dangers of drug and alcohol abuse by railroad employees. The Federal Railroad Administration implemented regulations requiring mandatory blood and urine tests of employees involved in certain train accidents. It also allowed railroads to administer breath and urine tests to employees who violate certain safety rules. The question the Supreme Court was presented was, did this violate the Fourth Amendment? The court ruled no, saying that preventing accidents and assuring safety reduced the expectations of privacy for railroad employees. As in Vernonia School District v. Acton, school officials were concerned that drug use increased the risk of sport related injuries. The high school football and wrestling coach witnessed a severe sternum injury suffered by a wrestler and various safety misexecutions by football players, which lead the coach to believe it was drug use related.
In a 6-3 decision, the Court ruled that the Districts drug testing policy did not violate the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures.