Student Drug Testing and Supreme Court Precedents

"Skinner and Von Raab indicate that 'compelling' governmental interests in public safety or national security may, in appropriate circumstances, override constitutional objections to testing procedures by employees whose privacy expectations are diminished by the nature of their duties or the workplace scrutiny to which they are otherwise subject. In Earls and Vernonia, the Court concludes that specials needs are inherent to the public school setting in which the government serves as "guardian and tutor" to minor students. The Earls and Vernonia rulings also make clear that minors have diminished privacy expectations relative to adults, especially when drug testing is implemented by individuals in a guardian or tutor capacity. Although not dispositive, Earls, Vernonia, and Chandler also illustrate that drug testing programs imposed on a subset of the population that has a 'demonstrated problem of drug abuse' may tilt the balancing test in the government's favor, especially if the testing program is designed to effectively address the problem. The extent to which drug test results are shared or kept confidential also may be relevant to a court's review of the competing public and private interests. Drug testing programs that require results to be kept confidential to all but a small group of non-law enforcement officials, are not conducted for criminal law enforcement purposes, and that only minimally impact an individual's life are more likely to be considered reasonable. On the other hand, programs that allow drug test results to be shared, especially with law enforcement, or that otherwise have the potential to negatively impact multiple or significant aspects of an individual's life, may be less likely to be considered reasonable."