NCJ Number
123625
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 80 Issue: 4 Dated: (Winter 1990) Pages: 1052-1085
Date Published
1990
Length
34 pages
Annotation
This analysis of United States Supreme Court's 1989 decision that the drug and alcohol testing of railroad employees represented a reasonable search concludes that the Court majority erred and that search involved in drug testing should take place according to the literal requirements of the Fourth Amendment.
Abstract
In Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Association, the Court held that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) drug testing program did not violate the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unlawful searches and seizures, even though the FRA regulations do not require a warrant, probable cause, or a reasonable suspicion that an employee is impaired by the use of alcohol or drugs. The Court majority balanced government interests in conducting the testing program against employee interests in privacy to reach this conclusion. However, the balancing-of-interests tests is too broad and too subject to manipulation to be appropriate in such a case. In addition, the Court failed to weigh the privacy side of the balancing test properly. This case confirms Justice Marshall's belief that the subjective balancing test can achieve any outcome desired. This decision will continue to have harmful consequences for future applications of the Fourth Amendment to drug testing issues. 231 footnotes.