Petitioners v. Lindsay Earls

In both court cases, Vernonia v. Acton and Petitioners v. Earl, the students felt as though their rights were being violated. And, in both cases the school's protected their right to detect and deter drug use in their student athletes. The main difference is that Acton was suing because of his personal experience with being suspended due to testing positive in various drug tests. Earl merely felt as though the school was being unfair and nosy with their testing. In both cases, the court ruled that the school's actions were Constitutional because they have a right to help their students. "Finally, we find that testing students who participate in extracurricular activities is a reasonably effective means of addressing the School District's legitimate concerns in preventing, deterring, and detecting drug use" (Justice Thomas Petitioners v. Earl decision). The reasoning behind the courts decision to allow the school to perform drug tests in both cases, is because they feel as though the school has a right to know what is going on with their students. Plus, the court also realizes and that school children are the future of America, and if schools don't set them straight now, then they may never be. The court also ruled that it is not violating kids privacy if schools perform drug tests, in order to make a safe learning environment. I definitely agree with the courts decision to allow schools do carry out drug testing because of the many reasons listed above. Kids that do unlawful acts, should not have the same extracurricular rights as kids who follow the law and are good citizens.