Review-Journal LogoDonrey
Monday, January 20, 1997

Passing the bottle

Challenging candidate drug tests.

     Although the U.S. Supreme Court works in mysterious ways, the questions asked by the justices at a Jan. 4 hearing would indicate considerable skepticism from the bench about a new requirement that all Georgia political candidates submit to drug tests.
      Challenging the law were Georgia Libertarian candidates Walker Chandler, Sharon Harris and James Walker, who ran for lieutenant governor, state agriculture commissioner and a seat in the Georgia state Legislature (respectively). All passed their drug tests last year, after submitting to them under protest. None won election.
      Georgia Assistant Attorney General Patricia Guilday argued the mandatory testing program is desirable not only to guarantee habitual drug users never end up on the ballot, but also to send a "zero tolerance" message. But Ms. Guilday conceded, under questioning by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, that there is no evidence of a drug problem among elected officials there.
      Justice David Souter got Ms. Guilford to agree that requiring all candidates to submit to drug searches of their homes would be unconstitutional. He then asked her to explain "why opening a house is more intrusive than opening a body."
Next Column


      "This court looks a little more closely at totally suspicionless searches, doesn't it?" asked Justice Antonin Scalia.
      "Doesn't the Constitution come first?" asked Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
      Indeed it does.
      The state of Georgia is not a private business, which would enjoy more leeway in setting down employment requirements. As a government entity, it must adhere to stricter constitutional standards.
      The Supreme Court has upheld mandatory government drug testing in a number of instances, most recently in the case of a high school that tested student athletes. But the court at least demanded some showing that the testing had a practical effect.
      The state of Georgia, however, all but admitted that its drug-testing of politicians is merely a symbolic attempt to highlight the evils of illegal drug use.
      This is hardly justification, as Justice Scalia noted, for government to demand that every candidate for political office submit to a suspicionless search.
      The court is expected to rule by July.
     
Make your voice heard!
Write us at
letters@lvrj.com

[News] [Sports] [Business] [Lifestyles] [Neon] [Opinion] [in-depth]
[Classifieds] [Help/About] [Home] [Archive] [Current Edition]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]