Lindsay Earls '05 had her day in court -- the U.S. Supreme Court, to be exact -- on March 19 as the nine justices heard her case contesting the constitutionality of drug testing in schools.
Earls sued her high school in 1997 as a result of a drug test she had to take in order to participate in choir. She was "humiliated" by the experience and felt that the school's random drug testing of students participating in non-athletic extracurricular events was unconstitutional. After a series of appeals, the case now lies in the hands of the Supreme Court.
Although they have yet to make a ruling, some of the nine justices made their inclinations clear.
At one point while Graham Boyd, Earls' lawyer, argued his case, Justice Anthony Kennedy made a scathing comment.
"No parent would send their child to a 'druggie' school, except perhaps your client," Kennedy said to Boyd during the hearing, referring to schools not allowed to do random drug testing. Earls has actually tested negative in all three of her drug tests and says that she has never used drugs.
"I was shocked to the point that I thought it was funny and started cracking up," said Earls, who was present in the courtroom. "My dad's jaw just dropped. Everybody was very upset."
Kennedy's viewpoint was apparently shared by Justice Antonin Scalia and Chief Justice William Rehnquist, both of whom "harshly questioned" Boyd's arguments, according to Earls.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg, David H. Souter and Sandra Day O'Connor appeared to lean the other way, skeptical of lawyer Linda Meoli's arguments for the Oklahoma school's drug testing policy. O'Connor mentioned that "it seems odd to try to penalize those students" who participate in extracurricular events that have been shown to deter students from using drugs.
The Bush administration supported the expansion of drug testing in schools. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement represented the administration, arguing that the testing was a part of the extracurricular activities and that students had the option to avoid it by opting not to participate.
Justice Souter objected, noting that students "are under tremendous pressure to agree to it. They know perfectly well that they won't get into a competitive college" without these activities.
In spite of their comments, Earls kept in mind that the justices will not make a decision until this summer. "They ask pointed questions and sometimes they seem to give themselves away, but you can't ever tell until the actual decision," she said.
After 30 minutes of oral arguments peppered with justices' questions and comments, Earls expressed appreciation for her lawyer.
"Graham did his very best and he did a fantastic job," she said. "Looking back, I don't feel confident that we won, but I don't think we lost either."
Boyd, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, agreed to take the case and try to change the policy of non-athletic drug testing because "the school's policy forces students to choose between forfeiting their privacy and forfeiting their chances of going to a good school such as Dartmouth."
