This note will address the concerns raised by suspicionless drug-testing programs in public high schools by ultimately arguing that public policy considerations should be factored into the Supreme Court's balancing test, and that such considerations will weigh and balance against expanding drug-testing programs to contexts beyond those already upheld by the Supreme Court. At the least, this note will argue that the Groveport Madison drug-testing program, imposed on students applying for on-campus parking privileges, should not be upheld. However, before this argument can be properly asserted, a number of pertinent topics must be discussed. Section II of this note will begin by discussing the primary Supreme Court cases that address certain legal issues relevant to drug-testing programs. This section will also discuss the cases specifically addressing drug-testing programs, including those implemented by public high schools. Section III of this note will apply the Supreme Court's balancing test to the Groveport Madison program. Section IV of this note will analyze certain public policy considerations according to their relevant factors in the Supreme Court's balancing test. In conclusion, this note will argue that such public policy consideration weigh the Supreme Court's balancing test against the program implemented by Groveport Madison, and that high school drug testing programs should be limited to those contexts already specifically upheld by the Court.
Note, Pee-to Park: Should Public High School Students Applying for on-Campus Parking Priviledges Be Required to Pass a Drug Test, 8 J.L. & Health 229 (2003-2004)