| |
Texas
Texas City is a city in Galveston County in
the U.S. state of Texas within the Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown
metropolitan area. As of the 2000 U.S. Census, the city
population was 41,521 (though a 2004 estimate placed the
population at 43,535).
|
 |
|
US District Court Overturns Mandatory Drug Tests
in Texas School, Lockney Policy Was Nation's Broadest
3/16/01
Although the US Supreme Court opined in its 1995 Vernonia ruling
that anti-drug goals justified the drug testing of student athletes
and those involved in extracurricular activities, US District Judge
Sam Cummings drew a line in the West Texas sand when he struck down
the Lockney Independent School District's year-old mandatory drug
testing policy for all of its junior and senior high school students.
 |
"Hallelujah," was Larry Tannahill's response. It
was Tannahill who sued the district on behalf of his 12-year-old
son, Brady. Tannahill has spent the last year in a lonely
struggle for what he believed was right in a community where
the school drug-testing program had overwhelming popular support.
Town residents rallied in the hundreds in support of the policy,
Tannahill suffered increasing social ostracism, and even reporters
have been the objects of locals' wrath over coverage of the
issue. Tannahill found himself vindicated last week.
Unless the Lockney school board decides to appeal -- it has
so far deferred that decision -- the ruling will mark the
end of the nation's broadest school drug testing policy. Along
with a similar ruling on a case from nearby Tulia, the Lockney
ruling sends a signal to school boards across the land about
the limits of the permissible when it comes to waging the
drug war in the nation's schools.
|
|
A little more than a year ago, Lockney's school board instituted
a policy of mandatory, random drug tests of all teachers and students.
Parents were asked to sign consent forms, and if they refused,
their children were to be treated as if they had failed the drug
test. The first-time penalty was a 21-day ban from extracurricular
activities, three days of in-school suspension, and three sessions
of drug counseling.
School officials said the drug tests were necessary for public
health, to increase students' ability to learn, to help them resist
peer pressure, and because of a perceived drug problem. The farming
town of 2,300 people saw 12 people arrested in a 1998 cocaine
bust -- all adults -- but has shown few indications of drug activity
since then.
Tannahill refused to sign the consent form. "Every person
has a right to his own opinion, and I do not think they can enforce
this," he told the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal after the policy
was announced. "It's just a matter of principle for me...
I cannot let the school say, 'I know how to raise your child better
than you.' What scares me the most, if I do not sign it, they
are going to punish my child for what I do, and I definitely do
not think that's right."
Although the school district eventually agreed to postpone any
punishment of Brady Tannahill while the dispute lingered, Tannahill
soon picked up support from the ACLU of Texas. Lawyers affiliated
with the civil liberties group represented him when he brought
suit against the district for violating his son's Fourth and Fourteenth
Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.
"We're upset," ACLU Lubbock chapter member Harvey Madison
told the Avalanche-Journal. "This is exactly the kind of
abuse the founding fathers were trying to protect people from
when they wrote the Bill of Rights. We do not live in a fascist
country, and the government is not entitled to simply declare
that it can conduct intrusive searches of everyone with no reason."
Last week, while expressing sympathy for the school board's motives,
Judge Cummings saw it the same way.
"The court recognizes the good-faith efforts of school districts
in their attempts to win what has become a frustrating war on
drugs; it understands the motives of the district to protect its
students," Cummings wrote. "The court further recognizes
that given advancements in technology and research, a mandatory
drug policy of testing every teenage student could potentially
eliminate drug use for such an impressionable segment of our population,"
he continued.
"But with such an intrusion also comes a great price to
citizens' constitutionally guaranteed rights to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects."
Will Harrell, executive director of the Texas ACLU told DRCNet
the ruling was "an absolute, resounding victory."
"This is a strong testament that there are still courts
with the courage to stand up for individual freedom in the face
of the drug-war hysteria that has besieged our nation," Harrell
said. "The law has clarified that this policy is unconstitutional
as applied."
Harrell urged the Lockney school board not to appeal. "I
hope they will respect the courts and let Mr. Tannahill get on
with his life. He has been vindicated today and he should be honored
for standing up to what is obviously an unconstitutional practice,"
Harrell told DRCNet.
"This ruling is a signal bell to end of all of these ridiculous
and unconstitutional drug testing policies," Harrell continued.
"It's not the first, but I hope it's the last of a long line
of federal decisions that make clear students don't abandon their
constitutional rights at the school house gate."
|
|

|
Cummings' decision to overturn the Lockney policy
was foreshadowed in December, when US District Court Judge Mary
Lou Robinson of Amarillo threw out a more restrictive school drug-testing
policy in the panhandle town of Tulia, now notorious for its massive
drug bust targeting the small town's African-American population
(http://www.drcnet.org/wol/154.html#tulia). In the Tulia case, the
school district required drug tests for all students in grades 7-12
who wanted to participate in extracurricular activities.
But Robinson ruled that the policy violated constitutional
protections against unwarranted search and seizure, writing: "This
Court concludes that the mandatory, random, suspicionless drug testing
program for all students participating in extracurricular activities
at Tulia ISD is violative of the Fourth Amendment."
|
In the wake of the rulings, school officials are rethinking plans for
drug testing. In the Texas Panhandle town of Brownfield, School Superintendent
Charles Harrison told the Avalanche-Journal he will be watching to see
if there are appeals.
"What we're doing is following the case, and until we get a definite
ruling and some parameters in how to distribute drug tests, we're not
interested in starting one," he said. "We have just been really
slow in putting something in place until we knew for sure what was legal
and what was not."
The Texas ACLU's Harrell also told DRCNet that Brownfield wasn't alone
in reconsidering testing students for drugs.
"Policies that were put on hold pending resolution
of the Lockney case are now permanently on hold," said Harrell. "The
dynamics of local politics are such that school board members campaign
on a "tough on drugs" platform, but school superintendents are
beginning to understand that when you impose an unconstitutional policy,
it's going to cost them. The superintendents would rather spend school
district funds on books than on losing court cases."
The Lockney ruling's impact could extend beyond Texas, according
to Julie Underwood, general counsel for the National School Boards Association.
"We got a flurry of calls after the ruling was announced,"
she told DRCNet. "While school boards typically ask their own attorneys
about the legality of various testing policies, they asked us if we have
drafted a policy. We don't have a national policy, though, because of
the variation in state laws."
"The association does not have an official position
on student drug testing," said Underwood. "We take the position
that school districts should be able to keep their campuses safe, but
they must uphold students' rights as well. We encourage districts to have
a reasonable policy, meaning if they don't have an individualized suspicion
of drug use, they must have clear evidence of a drug problem to justify
testing," she said.
"Many school districts have no need for a drug testing
policy," Underwood noted.
sources : http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/177/lockney.shtml
How can I get help?
There are various types of alcohol addictions, drug rehabs
and treatment programs. When choosing a drug rehab center for yourself
or a loved one, it is crucial to be informed about the different types
of drug rehabs and what the end results are.
Deciding on a drug rehab center (drug treatment for either
alcohol or drugs) can be really confusing due to all the different programs
and philosophies. The Narconon Drug rehabilitation process has different
phases that will bring the individuals to a drug free life.
For immediate assistance call now 1-877-782-7409.
A professional counselor will be there to assist you
Back to top
Or contact us online now!
|