Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Board of Education v. Earls (2002)

Read a random definition: juris utriusque doctor

A quick definition of Board of Education v. Earls (2002):

In this case, the Supreme Court said that a school in Oklahoma could require students who participate in after-school activities to take drug tests. The Court said that the school's policy did not violate the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures. The Court said that students who participate in after-school activities have less privacy than other students, and that the drug tests were not a big invasion of privacy. The Court also said that the school had a good reason for doing the drug tests, which was to stop drug use among students.

A more thorough explanation:

Board of Education v. Earls is a Supreme Court case that dealt with the constitutionality of a school district's policy requiring all students participating in extracurricular activities to consent to random drug testing. The Court held that the policy did not violate the Fourth Amendment and was constitutional.

The Court had previously upheld the constitutionality of suspicionless drug testing for student athletes in Vernonia Sch. District 47J v. Acton, but the policy in this case was even broader. The School District's collection of urine samples for drug testing implicated the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

The Court evaluated the reasonableness of the drug testing policy by weighing the students' privacy interests against the policy's promotion of legitimate government interests. The Court found that the students affected by the drug testing policy had a limited expectation of privacy. By participating in extracurricular activities, students voluntarily subject themselves to rules that do not apply to the student body as a whole. Submitting to these extra regulations diminishes an already limited expectation of privacy in the public school context.

The Court also found that the testing itself was not a significant invasion of privacy. The method of urine collection was minimally intrusive, and the only consequences of a failed test would be to limit a student's participation in extracurricular activities.

The Court concluded that the testing policy was a reasonable means of furthering the School District's interest in detecting and deterring drug use among its students. The School District offered sufficient evidence of drug use in its schools to show a special need for suspicionless testing.

For example, if a student wants to participate in the school's football team, they must consent to random drug testing. If they fail the test, they may not be allowed to play in the next game. This policy is constitutional because the students have a limited expectation of privacy when participating in extracurricular activities, and the testing is a reasonable means of detecting and deterring drug use among students.

board of directors | Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA)

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
RoaldDahl
16:05
dodged the mich r wave what does this mean
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:06
it means you will not be rejected today and may be accepted or WL in the future
Just got my Michigan rejection
BookwormBroker
16:10
same
RoaldDahl
16:10
@HopefullyInLawSchool: what if i already got rejected. does it mean anything
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:12
@RoaldDahl: Likely not however it could mean nothing
RoaldDahl
16:15
So if it means nothing does that mean something?
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:17
Possibly
RoaldDahl
16:26
Cool
RoaldDahl
16:26
thank you!!!! i hope it means something
pinkandblue
16:31
fart
IrishDinosaur
16:36
Mich R gang lesgooo
Did anyone else get that random get to know nova email?
HopefullyInLawSchool
17:21
Ya it was sent to all YM applicants
starfishies
17:37
Anyone get the NDLS email inviting you to apply for something even though they haven’t made a decision on your app yet
17:38
Better yet I got the email and I was rejected last month
starfishies
17:38
Wtf
starfishies
17:39
and the deadline is in like a week what is this
any cardozo movement?
BatmanBeyond
18:01
Sent a LOCI via portal, but I'm wondering if email would have gotten me a swifter response
BatmanBeyond
18:02
This whole hold/wait-list/reserve system is a headache
loci already?
BatmanBeyond
18:09
If the odds are like 1-2% I don't think it matters much by the numbers
12:11
I got the same NDLS email
OrangeThing
12:18
I think the user profiles are broken
19:29
Any word out of Notre Dame?
19:29
Only the invitation to apply for LSE
19:29
Anyone received a decision from NDLS?
19:50
when did u guys apply that just heard from umich? they havent even glanced at my app yet
0:30
how am i supposed to spy on people when profile links are broken?
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.