A US district court judge in Missouri resolved that a technical college violated the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. Due to the order of a technical college all students were to pass mandatory drug test.
The judge permitted drug testing only in case school officials can prove and give reasonable arguments of the fact that there was a threat to public safety
Linn State Technical College students went to law against the college and its president, Donald Claycomb. In 2011, the college stated it would demand all new students to pass a drug test.
According to federal courts, drug testing by governmental organizations when there are no particularized suspicions of using drugs is unconstitutional, but there are limited exceptions – minor school students, certain law enforcement personnel, and when it comes to public safety. Linn State Technical College stated that they did not break the law as professions of some students deal with public safety.
But taking into consideration the fact that there had never been a drug-related accident for 50 years and with regard to federal court exceptions, the judge Judge Laughery ruled that only in three academic programs of twenty eight suggested by Linn State Technical College was there a sufficient public safety interest that would tolerate drug testing.
Judge Laughery barred Linn State Technical College to carry out drug testing of students except those three academic programs related to public safety. What is more, the judge also ruled to destroy all urine samples and refund all expenses for drug tests to all students except those in three academic programs. Students paid 50$ for urine sample drug test.
The Linn State Technical College students were represented by the ACLU of Eastern Missouri. \”Like most Americans, Missourians are tired of the War on Drugs and policies that assume that everyone is guilty of illegal drug use,” said ACLU of Eastern Missouri executive director Jeffrey Mittman. \”The court recognized that illusory safety concerns can be used ‘to mask unconstitutional purposes.’”