cannabisnews.com: Lockney Parent Wins Drug-Test Battle Lockney Parent Wins Drug-Test Battle Posted by FoM on March 03, 2001 at 09:12:34 PT By Linda Kane, Avalanche-Journal Source: Avalanche-Journal U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings ruled Thursday in favor of a parent who sued the Lockney Independent School District claiming its mandatory drug-testing policy was unconstitutional.Larry Tannahill refused to allow his son to be tested when the school first began drug screening students and faculty in February 2000. With help from the American Civil Liberties Union, Tannahill sued the school district claiming that its policy violated his son's rights under the Fourth and 14th Amendments, which protect against unreasonable searches and seizures.''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' ruling said.''The court further recognizes that given advancements in technology and research, a mandatory drug policy of testing every teen-age student could potentially eliminate drug use for such an impressionable segment of our population,'' the ruling said.''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.' ''In December, U.S. District Judge Mary Lou Robinson in Amarillo found a similar drug-testing policy in the Tulia school district unconstitutional. She ruled that its policy also violated a student's right to avoid unreasonable searches and seizures.When asked how he felt about the judge's ruling, Tannahill said, ''Hallelujah.''Tannahill said he was confident the judge would rule in his favor.''I knew we had a strong case,'' he said. ''I will tell you that I'm surprised he ruled this quick, and I'm pleased with that. As far as the way he ruled, I was extremely confident about that.''Many in this small farming community about 50 miles northeast of Lubbock have supported the drug policy.In March 2000, hundreds of adults and students attended a public meeting where they wore red and white T-shirts that said, ''We asked for it. LISD delivered it. We appreciate it.''The drug-testing policy, which was revised in July after thelawsuit was filed, called for testing students in seventh through 12th grades. Those who refused to be tested could not participate in extracurricular activities.About 85 percent of the students in Lockney participate in extracurricular activities, the superintendent has said.Tannahill was the only parent who challenged the policy. The school board did not test his son while the lawsuit was pending and agreed to not punish him pending the judge's ruling.Supt. Raymond Lusk said Thursday afternoon he hadn't seen a copy of the judge's ruling.''I wouldn't have any comment to make at all, other than we'll have to consider the outcome and make some decisions based on that,'' he said.Will Harrell, executive director of the Texas ACLU, said Thursday he also hadn't seen a copy of the ruling, but called it ''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 sieged our nation,'' Harrell said.He said the ruling should force the school district to throw out its policy.''The law has been clarified that this policy is unconstitutional as applied,'' Harrell said.The attorney for the school district could not be reached Thursday for comment.Harrell said he hopes the case won't be appealed.''I would hope that they would let this rest,'' he said.He added, ''And 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 against what is obviously an unconstitutional practice.''Linda Kane can be contacted at: lkane lubbockonline.comSource: Lubbock Avalanche-Journal (TX) Author: Linda Kane, Avalanche-Journal Published: Friday, March 2, 2001Copyright: 2001 The Lubbock Avalanche-Journal Contact: ajnews lubbockonline.com Website: http://www.lubbockonline.com/ Forum: http://chat.lubbockonline.com:90/eshare/Feedback: http://www.lubbockonline.com/interactive/edit.shtml Related Articles & Web Site:ACLUhttp://www.aclu.org/Lockney ISD Changes Policy for Drug Tests http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6741.shtmlSchool Dist. Denies Drug Testing Deprives Student http://cannabisnews.com/news/5/thread5773.shtmlCannabisNews Drug Testing Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/drug_testing.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #3 posted by raoul duke on March 03, 2001 at 16:18:09 PT we don't have any rights anymore this BS is getting way out of hand,you can't get a job or go to school now without pissing in front of some ahole in a cup.i can't wait to see their nifty new armbands and shiny black boots and that wonderful march they like to do, let's see, it's called the goose step is'nt it?"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."- Hermann Goering, founder of the Nazi Gestapo - http://www.jackherer.com [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by military officer guy on March 03, 2001 at 09:55:37 PT unless you're in the military... you're right DOC this does show an important message to the antis...we got this memo last week from some high ranking defense department guy(can't remember his name or what his position was), but he was ranting and raving about how important it is to have random peepee test in the military...i have to get a copy of it and post it here, because you all would laugh your asses off...but i can't say no to a pee test, because we have are own set of laws that are in a lot ways very different than a normal guy on the street...i don't remember my point when i started writing this, so i'll shut up now...we can win this war [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Ethan Russo, MD on March 03, 2001 at 09:33:20 PT: Drugs and Drug Testing The moral of this story is that people who do not like drugs do not have to use them. However, those who do not wish drug tests can not be forced to have them (without probable cause). Let sanity and the Constitution prevail. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: