Drug Testing College Student Athletes

1
Drug Testing College Student Athletes

• Constitutional or Unconstitutional ?
• Adam Fisher

2
4th Amendment

• The right of the people to be secure in their
  persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
  unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
  violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
  probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation,
  and particularly describing the place to be
  searched, and the persons or things to be seized
• I know weve seen this before!!

3
The BIG Court Case

• Vernonia School District 47 J v. Acton
• Supreme Court decision which upheld
  constitutionality of random drug testing regime
  implemented by the local public schools in
  Vernonia, Oregon
• Under this agreement- student athletes were
  required to submit to a random drug testing
  before being allowed to participate in sports.
• The Supreme Court held that the tests were
  searched under the Fourth Amendment, they were
  however reasonable due to schools interest in
  preventing teenage drug use.

4
Vernonia School District 47 J v. Acton

• Mid 1980s Vernonia, Oregon noticed a rise in
  drug use among the students of the school
  district
• Student Athletes were the leaders of the drug
  culture
• At trial coaches noted they had witnessed
  injuries attributable to a student drug use.
• Taking Action
• School district offered special classes, guest
  speakers and presentations to the students in
  order to try and reduce the drug usage in the
  school district.
• The drug problem continued- school board meets
  with parents new drug testing plan was adopted
  by the district.

5

• Protocol of random drug testing by Vernonia
  School District
• Straight forward
• All student athletes would be required to submit
  to the program as a condition to play in
  athletics
• All athletes are tested at the beginning of the
  year
• 10 randomly selected every week to provide urine
  sample
• Sampled were collected in a manner that preserved
  the students modesty.
• Once each week during the season names of
  athletes are placed in a pool from which a
  student, with the supervision of two adults
  blindly draws a name for the random testing.
• If a student tested positive the student was
  given the option of either undergoing counseling
  session or submitting to 6 weekly drug tests or
  sit out the remainder of the season and also sit
  out the following year.
• About the Actual Drug Testing
• Students wishing to play sports must sign a
  form consenting to the testing and must obtain
  written consent of their parents.
• The urine samples are sent to an independent
  laboratory
• the lab procedures are 99.94 accurate
• The labs do not know the identity of the students
  
• Only the superintendent, principals, vice
  principals, and Ads have access to the results
• Legitimate privacy expectations are less with
  regard to student athletes
• School sports require suiting up before each
  practice or game and showering (Communal) and
  changing after

6
Board of Education v. Earls

• 2002 Court decision of the Supreme Court of the
  US ruled 5-4 that mandatory drug testing in
  extracurricular activities was constitutional.
• Lindsay Earls, Daniel James and their families
  sued against the school board of Tecumseh,
  Oklahoma.
• They alleged that their policy requiring students
  to consent to a random urinalysis testing for
  drug use violated the Fourth Amendment of the
  United States Constitution.
• Policy- The Student Activities Drug Testing
  Policy adopted by the Tecumseh, Oklahoma School
  District requires all middle and high school
  students to consent to a urinalysis testing for
  drugs in order to participate in any
  extracurricular activity. In practice, the
  Policy has been applied only to competitive
  extracurricular activities sanctioned by the
  Oklahoma Secondary Schools Activities Association
  (OSSAA). (5)
• Supreme Court held that students in
  extracurricular activities had a diminished
  expectation of privacy and that the policy
  furthered an important interest of the schools in
  preventing the drug use amongst the student body

7
Board of Education v. Earls

• The invasion of students privacy is not
  significant, given the minimally intrusive nature
  of the sample collection and the limited uses to
  which the test results are put.
• The Policy clearly requires that the test results
  be kept in confidential files separate from a
  students other records and released to school
  personnel only on a need to know basis
• The tests are not permitted to be turned over to
  any law enforcement authority- nor do they have
  any disciplinary action on academic.
• Only consequence of a failed drug test is to
  limit the students privilege of participating in
  extracurricular activities.
• Supreme Court States- Tecumsehs Policy is a
  reasonable means of furthering the School
  Districts important interest in preventing and
  deterring drug use among its schoolchildren and
  does not violate the Fourth Amendment. Rationale
  was based on the precedent Vernonia School
  District 47J v. Acton which had allowed drug
  testing for student-athletes.

8
NCAA on DRUG TESTING

• NCAA Administrative Law
• History
• NCAA institutions reaffirmed their dedication to
  the ideal of fair and equitable competition at
  their championship and post season certified
  events
• Looking out for protection and
  safety of health of the Student Athletes
• Make sure no one participant has an artificially
  induced advantage
• The NCAA drug-testing program involves urine
  collection on specific occasions and laboratory
  analyses for substances on a list of banned-drug
  classes developed by the NCAA Executive Committee
  
• Drug Testing Legislation The active member
  shall administer annually, on a form, prescribed
  by the (5) Academics/Eligibility/Compliance
  Cabinet, a signed drug testing consent form for
  each student athlete by the bylaws of the NCAA

9
NCAA DRUG TESTING

• In sports in which the NCAA conducts year-round
  drug testing- consent form shall be given each
  academic year before the first practice.
• In year round drug testing sports
  student-athletes can be selected on the basis of
  position, competitive ranking, athletics
  financial-aid status, playing time, and NCAA
  approved random selection of any combination of
  thereof.
• Failure to sign the consent form by the deadline
  given shall result in the student athletes
  ineligibility to practice or compete until they
  have signed the form
• Ineligibility for Use of Banned Drugs
• A student-athlete who is found to have tested
  positive shall be declared ineligible for further
  participation in postseason and regular season
  competition in accordance with ineligibility
  provisions in Bylaws of the NCAA
• A student-athlete who tests positive will be
  charged with the loss of a minimum of one season
  competition in all sports
• The student-athlete shall remain ineligible for
  all regular and postseason competition during one
  calendar year period 365 days
• A student-athlete may appeal to the Committee on
  Competitive Safeguard and Medical Aspects of
  Sports.
• If a student-athlete tests positive a 2nd time-
  for anything other than a street drug which
  the NCAA clearly defines he shall lose two
  seasons of play

10
THE CASE

• The NCAA instituted a drug testing program in
  1986 after many college athletes tested
  positive for drugs at Pan-American Games
• The NCAA started to only test at National
  Championships and Bowl Games
• NCAA rules (back then) required each
  student-athlete to consent to drug testing if
  they wanted to participate in sports

11
The Case

• Hill v. Natl Collegiate Athletic Assoc.
• The case was originally brought by Stanford Diver
  Simone LeVant who graduated and the suit was
  continued by Jennifer Hill- (Soccer), J. Barry
  McKeever (Football)
• Started when LeVant Captain of the swim team
  refused to sign a consent form requiring her to
  take a urine test at the N.C.A.A Championships
• They were backed by the Northern California
  Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and
  filed suit in Santa Clara
• Stanford joined as a plaintiff so lower court
  injunctions would apply equally to all its
  students until there was a final Supreme Court
  determination
• The California Supreme Court used a three part
  test to determine whether Hills allegation of
  privacy invasion was valid. Court stated
  monitoring urination and questioning a
  student-athletes medical condition was a legally
  protected privacy interest.
• Student-athletes have a choice to withdraw from
  athletic participation and not undergo drug
  testing (reasonable expectation of privacy is
  diminished)
• NCAA urinalysis test does not constitute a
  serious invasion of privacy
• Court stated drug testing program furthered the
  NCAAs legitimate interest in maintaining the
  integrity of intercollegiate athletic
  programs-safeguarding intercollegiate athletic
  competition
• Court reversed the trial courts permanent
  injunction against the NCAA allowing the NCAA
  to conduct drug-testing on student-athletes

12
CASE DISCUSSION

• GROUPS of 2 or 3 ( I know some of the girls in
  the class dont like to branch out with other
  people and always work together)
• Discuss if you think the NCAA was right or wrong?
  Legal or illegal? And why?

13
The Case at first- follow up of group
discussion

• First- the case was considered unconstitutional
  invasion of privacy
• - Supreme Court Judge Conrad Rushing permanent
  
• injunction against requiring Stanford athletes to
  submit to NCAA drug testing
• Invade student-athletes privacy and interferes
  with the athletes right to treat themselves with
  appropriate over-the counter medications as other
  students do. (11)
• - 34-3,511 drug tests by the NCAA
  came up positive (mbb/fb) - NCAA first year of
  drug testing 99 of athletes clean
• - THE NCAA couldnt continue to
  operate its testing program with
• a school exempt from drug testing Frank
  Uryasz- NCAA drug testing staff (after ruling)
• On January 28th, 1994 the court ruled 6-1
• The NCAA was well within its legal rights in
  adopting a drug-testing program designed to
  eliminate the actual or potential influence of
  drugs in competitive sports
• Courts noted- drug testing in other arenas
  including Olympic competition and professional
  sports, the court ruled that it is a reasonably
  expected part of the life of an athlete.

14
VILLANOVA POLICY - Source Villanova Athletics
Website

• As per University policy, all intercollegiate
  student athletes will be subjected to year-round,
  random drug testing on a bi-weekly basis.
  Individuals will be notified ahead of time when
  they have been selected. Testing may also occur
  at pre-season physicals, or with entire teams, at
  the discretion of the University. The University
  and the NCAA may also require testing in
  connection with NCAA Championship events

15

• Positive Drug Test Consequences
• -Source Villanova Website
• First Positive Test
• Meet with AD and/or Sport Administrator and Head
  Coach
• Parent(s) or Guardian will ordinarily be notified
  
• Possible suspension from practice and/or
  competition
• Regular drug testing
• Mandatory counseling
• Second Positive Test
• Meet with AD and/or Sport Administrator and Head
  Coach
• Parent(s) or Guardian will be notified
• Suspended from team immediately
• Athletics financial aid terminated
• Prohibited from competition for at least one year
  
• Regular drug testing

16
DUKE UNIVERSITY POLICY SIDE NOTE VILLANOVA
DID UPSET DUKE IN THE NCAA TOURNAMENT THIS YEAR-
JUST IN CASE ANYONE FORGOT!

• Any student athlete who tests positive for
  anabolic steroids, blood doping or masking agents
  will be suspended from athletic participation for
  one year 2nd offense lose eligibility all
  together.
• Counseling any student who tests positive for a
  street drug or anything on the NCAA banned list
  besides steroids 2nd positive suspended at
  minimum 50 of season 3rd banned from
  competition
• Zero tolerance on steroids - When athletes
  take steroids to cheat, they do not only do
  potential damage to their health, but they gain
  an unfair competitive advantage Senior AD,
  Chris Kennedy
• Unannounced drug testing for all student-athletes
  on Dukes 26 teams

17
(No Transcript)
18
What more can we do?

• Life Skills Program
• Teach, teach, teach
• Need to reach out to freshmen. Let them know
  early what is right and wrong

19
(No Transcript)
20
GROUPS OF 2

• YOU ARE IN CHARGE OF DEMARCO UNIVERSITY A WELL
  KNOWN DIVISION 1 WRESTLING SCHOOL
• (THEY HAVE A GREAT STAFF THAT MAKES SURE NO
  MATS AND BEAMS ARE OUT DURING COMPETITION)
• You are in charge of Freshmen / Athlete
  orientation come up with a 1-2 min commercial
  to show the freshmen why they shouldnt do drugs,
  what happens if they do drugs etc. Be creative
  - any ideas work present to class!