The Federal Railroad Administration, under its statutory authority to set safety standards, required employees to take a breath or urine test if they were involved in a serious train accident or if they violated safety rules. A court of appeals ruled that the tests could not be required without individualized suspicion. Writing for a 7-2 majority, however, Justice Anthony M. KennedyKennedy, Anthony M.;Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Association[Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Association] concluded that mandatory drug tests were reasonable in view of the government’s interest in safe transportation. It was not practical to require a warrant because of the speed at which evidence of drug abuse is absorbed by the body. A requirement of suspicion, moreover, could place the traveling public at risk because an employee’s performance could be impaired long before there was enough evidence to establish suspicion.Search and seizure;Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Association[Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Association]

The same day it issued Skinner, the Supreme Court also announced its approval of drug testing for customs inspectors in National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab[case]National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab[National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab] (1989). Later, in Vernonia School District v. Acton[case]Vernonia School District v. Acton[Vernonia School District v. Acton] (1995), the Court upheld random drug testing for students who participate in interscholastic sports. In Chandler v. Miller[case]Chandler v. Miller[Chandler v. Miller] (1997), however, the Court invalidated a Georgia policy requiring all political candidates to submit to drug testing.

Fourth Amendment

Labor

National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab

Privacy, right to

Search warrant requirement