= Premium Content

  • Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Previous

Next

ACLU Sues to Block Missouri College’s Mandatory Drug Tests

September 14, 2011, 5:59 pm

Linn State Technical College, the Missouri institution that began mandatory drug-screening of all new students this fall, has run into a court challenge, as civil libertarians had predicted. The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Eastern Missouri filed a lawsuit in federal court today accusing the college of violating students’ Fourth Amendment protections against unlawful searches and seizures. Kent Brown, a lawyer for Linn State, told the Associated Press that a federal judge had met with lawyers from both sides and had issued an order temporarily blocking the college from enforcing the policy, pending a hearing.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • tdb489

    During the 1980′s Nancy Regan’s “Just Say Not” campaign led to a proliferation of like titled initiatives throughout the country culminating in an invitation to address the U.N. General Assembly on international drug interdiction and trafficking laws.

    Likewise, ”the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has been the guardian of liberty, working in the nation’s courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve individual working rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution and the laws of the United States.”  Source:  ACLU.

    As with many laws, the intentions of the law can become so convoluted that it is scarcely recognizable years after it’s passage.  The modern ACLU’s pursuit of liberty, in my opinion, appears to pursue the liberties of those who wish to hide from the rule of law by twisting the true intent and meaning of that law.

    If you believe your “liberties” are infringed upon by drug testing, I suggest several reasons for that thinking.  1) You wish to conceal your drug habits by manipulating the law, 2)  you are more concerned with your own personal “inconveniences” than the safety of your co-workers, or 3) multiple other reasons which I will live to the readers’ imagination.

    Whether you are manufacturing machine parts which may put the public at risk due to their malfunction or whether you are an accountant who puts your client at risk of jail for miscalculated and/or falsified IRS reports, drug addicts are not welcome in my classroom, workplace or society.  If you consider that “diatribe” so be it. 

  • katisumas

    I guess alcohol drinkers are?

    If somebody can do the job properly, what they do on their off time is none of your business.

  • dashwood

    I wonder if this is legally actionable. If (1) one sets up a web site with what is promoted as an anonymous comment section, (2) individuals avail themselves of the opportunity to post anonymous comments, (3) those comments and their identities are revealed publicly, and (4) individuals making the comments can show that they have been damaged by having their names and comments revealed publicly, can the person seek damages in a civil court?

    Just wondering.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GGYJHDUNVKTEZHQGY7VKCTZ2RM Me

    As stupid, thoughtless, and repugnant as these types of sites are, this individual wins no plaudits for encouraging such behavior and then turning around and self-righteously outing those stupid enough to have played along. The real nugget of hypocrisy though:

    “Though the identities of PSUacb’s posters have been revealed, the site’s
    creator would only comment anonymously, for fear of physical violence.”

    But no one who has posted vile comments about others would ever have to fear the threat of physical violence? I’m all for anonymity where it serves a constructive purpose (wrote the guy using a pseudonym), but if you’re going to violate others’ anonymity, and potentially place people in jeopardy for the stupid things they’ve said, you might want to be willing to step forward yourself.

    This person (people?) would have been better off staying as far away from such a site as possible.

  • http://twitter.com/NoelineL NOELINEL

    Sounds like cyber-bullying with permission from the authorities.

  • nuckollsr

    The author writes: “Gossip sites like these pose tough questions
    for college leaders. Some students say the anonymous forums are
    breeding grounds for harassment. A few colleges tried to slow down the
    sites in the past by blocking them on their campuses or asking their
    creators to remove posts that named students.”

    This is a tee-ball hit . . . college leaders should make this a teaching moment. Bullies of all stripe are despotic progressives in training. They are exercising and honing the skills necessary to exert force or fraud against honorable innocents without a trace of remorse or empathy. Award them a degree of some high sounding skill and they’re ready to join elites at all levels of government equally willing to bring force of law or regulation to bear against anyone for any reason . . . as long as “small sacrifices are made for the greater good”.

    The only difference between the leader of a street gang, a DesPro in Congress and Saddam Hussein are the circumstances of their rise to power and the degree of power they hold. As soon as honorable behaviors for the protection of liberty are marginalized, the civil society is at risk for implosion. When a society no longer values and protects the liberty of independently self sufficient individuals and their ability to exchange value freely, growth stops, freedoms are forfeit and the society self destructs.

    This exercise in self immolation has been demonstrated countless times throughout history. For an institution of higher learning NOT to rise to occasion and explain this to their charges is a gross dereliction of duty as citizens of the United States of America.

  • http://twitter.com/PSUacb PSUacb.com

    There were many posts contributed by non-Greek students. When I chose to remove students’ names and leave only their organizations, there was no point in leaving up posts made by unaffiliated students.

    Also worth noting is that almost everyone identified is a freshman.

  • nuckollsr

    “I’m all for anonymity where it serves a constructive purpose . . .”

    How can this ever be constructive under the system of law crafted by our founding fathers? The courts of past circumstance call for the gathering of evidence, the testimony of honorable witness, judgement by peers and dispensing of justice in accordance with constitutional law. Making any portion of this process “secret” turns out the lights and elevates risk for dishonorable behaviors to go unobserved and ignored.

    Turn out enough lights, ignore a sufficient number of dishonorable behaviors and the observers become compliant and complacent. This gives rise to the present makeup of our government where 2 millions plus openly violate the liberties of everybody. It all started with behaviors of a few that were kept secret . . . a few that could quash the whistle blowers with impunity . . . or simply ignore them.

    It takes courage to make one’s allegations of dishonorable behaviors publicly . . . but it is the duty of every citizen who values their freedom.

  • helvetica

    It is interesting to note “that almost everyone identified [was] a freshman,” but an inference that might be drawn from that point is that the behavior is a reflection of immaturity that most students at Penn State (and elsewhere) outgrow.  If so, have the site and the ruse actually served a useful purpose? 

    While it is good for people to be circumspect about what they post–and to understand that the internet is never truly anonymous–is it better for people to have “learned” this through a combination of fear and shame (perhaps even well-deserved shame) or through whatever natural processes of maturation cause most of us to come to this understanding without such intervention? 

  • rlr524

    Sure, posting mean comments anonymously shows everyone you “suck.” But I don’t get how the site creater thinks he is any better by lying to people. Then the self-righteous comment below about freshman students. This guy sounds like as much of a jerk as anyone who posted on the site. Young people learn best when someone sets a good example. Maybe he will grow up one day, too.

  • rlr524

    Most do outgrow it, right. Obviously the creator of psuacb.com has yet to do so.

  • GambleIrma29

    Internet is the best choice for web workers as this makes great cash for them. My one of best friend is working at laptop and he brought 8 to 9K$ almost every month, Have you see this resource page ===>>⇛►http://freelancer111.blogspot.com 

  • legalgibbon

    Perhaps a corollary of this sentiment is: Why would we trust an unknown person, corporation, or other entity with information over which we wish to maintain control? Perhaps before we post on a site (e.g., CHE — ahem), we should ask ourselves why the entity is providing individuals with “free” access, services, or other benefits. There is no free lunch. If you look around the marketplace and don’t see the product, you’re probably it.

    With that in mind, we should not be surprised that entities do not treat our information in the way we might prefer it to be kept. For those of us who engage in information-sharing transactions, we should recognize that there might be consequences for giving away bits of ourselves. If each party to the transaction is willing to accept that risk, then each party wins. We just need to be aware that consequences other than what we bargained for might exist.
    (Just to be clear: I am not suggesting that entitites should be legally able to violate privacy policies or Terms of Service. I am suggesting, however, that we do not live in a perfect world. Furthermore, our own expectations can be misguided or misplaced. We might want to keep those things in mind.)

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.