NCJ Number
113890
Journal
Urban Lawyer Volume: 20 Issue: 2 Dated: (Spring 1988) Pages: 445-474
Date Published
1988
Length
30 pages
Annotation
Federal court decisions regarding the urinalysis drug testing of civilian public employees indicate that the reasonable suspicion standard of the Fourth Amendment will remain the general rule, except with respect to pre-employment and regular employee physical examinations.
Abstract
However, for specific types of jobs the courts will probably find additional limited exceptions to that standard. It is also unclear how the United States Supreme Court will handle the issue of drug testing of civilian public employees. Over the years the courts have struggled to find an appropriate balance between employer and employee interests in the context of a so-called national epidemic of drug use. Before 1985, reasonable suspicion of drug use was satisfied by the existence of a serious accident. In subsequent decisions, testing was required to be based on reasonable or individualized suspicion. More recent exceptions have focused on the circumstances in individual situations, such as prisons or nuclear power plants, or in particular job categories. The Supreme Court may decide to use either a broad standard of reasonableness or a narrower approach. The Fifth Amendment will probably not be an issue unless incriminating information on an employee consent form reveals illegal drug use that is disclosed to law enforcement authorities. 124 footnotes.