pee sharing is caring

In the Board of Education vs. Earls case, students were required to take random drug tests if they were in an extracurricular activity. Two students, Lindsay Earls and Daniel James, were against the random drug testing, claiming that the schools policy of random drug testing violated their Fourth Amendment rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution. The courts held that students in extracurricular activities have less privacy, and that the policy followed one of the schools goals, which is prevent drug use among students.

I agree with the schools decision to drug test, especially for those who are in extracurricular activities for the sole reason that preventing drug use is something that communities and schools try to prevent all the time, and if educating students about what it does and promoting them to not do it doesn’t stop them then they need to take more extreme measures.  If students don’t do drugs then it isn’t a hassle to just pee in a cup, and if they do then they are hurting their team and more importantly themselves.

After reading the article about drug sniffing dogs, I think it is absurd of a school to take that extreme of measures. For starters it is a complete disruption to the learning process, and looking back at freedom of speech cases in schools, if something is disruptive to the learning process it goes against what the main purpose of the school is for. The Schools should have the rights to drug test students, but I think that taking in the dogs is just way to over the top and takes away from what the schools main job is.