From the Palm Beach Post:
Miami U.S. District Judge Ursula Ungaro Thursday morning ruling that random, suspicionless testing of some 85,000 workers violates the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures also raises doubts about a new state law quietly signed by Scott this spring allowing the governor’s agency heads to require urine tests of new and existing workers.
“To be reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, a search ordinarily must be based on individualized suspicion of wrongdoing,” Ungaro wrote in her order issued this morning, citing previous U.S. Supreme Court orders which decided that urine tests are considered government searches.
Scott issued an executive order requiring random drug testing of new hires and all state workers after he took office last year. But he suspended the tests in June after labor unions and the ACLU challenged the order, objecting that the tests are a violation of the constitutional right to protection from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. Instead, Scott limited his order for all but corrections officers pending the outcome of the Miami case.
***
Ungaro rejected Scott’s lawyers’ arguments and data showing that about 1 percent of workers at certain agencies who underwent the drug screens tested positive. And she was not persuaded by the governor’s arguments that private sector drug testing shows widespread drug use among workers. She also did not agree that prospective or current state workers could seek employment elsewhere if they object to the tests. New hires, but not current state workers switching jobs, could be required to take the tests, Ungaro ruled.
“All of the upheld drug-testing policies were tailored to address a specific, serious problem. In contrast, the rationale for the Governor’s policy consists of broad prognostications concerning taxpayer savings, improved public service, and reductions in health and safety risks that result from a drug-free workplace,” Ungaro wrote.
Congrats to the ACLU on a great victory. The governor said he will appeal.
7 comments:
420
so sweat!!!!!!!!!!
"so sweet" because you think state employees should be allowed to use drugs, or sweet because you think the agency that employs them
shouldn't be able to find out about it?
Maybe it was "so sweet" because the Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable searched by the government and it is so sweet to see that such a right is still alive and well. But maybe 8:39 wants to volunteer to be randomly drug tested and to have their home, hardrive and smart phone randomply searched by the police/FBI. After all you do not have anything to hide 8:39, or do you?
State employees are not permitted to use drugs and the State is permitted to conduct drug tests of employees when there is suspicion that one is using. The Fourth Amendment, however, prohibits suspicion less searches by the government. Con Law 101, 5:39. No one is saying state employees should be permitted to use drugs but they should not have to undergo a urinanalysis every 90 days for no reason either.
shumie!!!
10:40, I don't really care if the workers who would not pose a danger to those they affect as part of their job come to work stones everyday. The school bus driver I do. They should be drug tested on a regular basis whether their supervisor thinks they are using or not! They don't have a right to that job, but I have a right to know that my child is not being driven by someone who may be using drugs.
Post a Comment