Alcohol Breath Test Before Prom

Is this an infringement on the 4th Amendment Search and Seizures protection?

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140409/NEWS/404090320/-1/rss01<BR>
By Pauline Liu
Times Herald-Record
Published: 2:00 AM - 04/09/14
Hot prom ticket: Blood alcohol test

MARLBORO — Along with the tuxedos, tiaras, and expensive ball gowns, teens attending the Marlboro High School junior prom might need a new accessory.

How about a blood alcohol test?

Marlboro isn't the first district in the mid-Hudson to ask prom goers to take a breath test, but the proposal is generating its share of controversy.

The district is taking a hard look at whether to have school resource officers (SROs) administer portable tests at the big bash.
It's scheduled for Friday, May 2nd from 6 p.m.-11 p.m. at the Poughkeepsie Grand Hotel.

Kids who flunk the test could find themselves suspended and barred from all year-end activities, including graduation, if they are seniors.

"I think it's an infringement on privacy," said parent Kimberly O'Sullivan on Tuesday outside the high school where she was picking up her daughter. She has two children at the high school.

Families such as O'Sullivans are divided on the issue.

"I think kids who drink shouldn't be allowed to go in and wreck everything for the rest of us," said junior Crysten Hunt, who is O'Sullivan's daughter.

According to principal RoseAnne Collins-Judon, parents seem to have more objections to the proposed policy than students do.

"The parents are asking about the timing of the roll-out and others feel they should have been included in the decision-making process," said Collins-Judon, who admits she's torn because she understands both sides of the debate.

The use of the portable breathalyzers at school events has been criticized by some civil libertarians who consider them an infringement of the 4th Amendment's "search and seizure" protections.

If anything, it seems that the increased attention focused on the prom has turned it into a hot ticket, despite the fact that the price of admission climbed from $ 55 to $ 60 during this final week of ticket sales, said prom committee president Maxwell Pietrzak.

"Sales jumped a bit lately, so I would say that the Breathalyzer proposal has had no (negative) impact on ticket sales," said Pietrzak, a senior who will also be this year's valedictorian.

"I think it's about time, because we've seen too much stuff go under the table involvin

Posted by LetltB
Is this an infringement on the 4th Amendment Search and Seizures protection?

Giving breathalyzer tests to minors, when the school could be sued if they get in an accident?

Technically, no.

Posted by Montgomery

Posted by LetltB
Is this an infringement on the 4th Amendment Search and Seizures protection?

Giving breathalyzer tests to minors, when the school could be sued if they get in an accident?

Technically, no.

click to expand

It is an infringement. An effort to avoid a lawsuit would be search PRIOR to walking through doors as a PREVENTION for any lawsuit. Purses, and emptying of pockets would suffice. What they do after is not the schools problem. Cops are TRAINED to visually observe a person intoxicated or on drugs..prior to walking through the door an eye test alone would also suffice. If they fail..they leave.

They already have searches in schools for weapons and drugs. That's good enough and I agree with that.

It's also why they have ADULT chaperones watching the kids along with the SRO officer(s).

Posted by LetltB

Posted by Montgomery

Posted by LetltB
Is this an infringement on the 4th Amendment Search and Seizures protection?

Giving breathalyzer tests to minors, when the school could be sued if they get in an accident?

Technically, no.

It is an infringement. An effort to avoid a lawsuit would be search PRIOR to walking through doors as a PREVENTION for any lawsuit. Purses, and emptying of pockets would suffice. What they do after is not the schools problem. Cops are TRAINED to visually observe a person intoxicated or on drugs..prior to walking through the door an eye test alone would also suffice. If they fail..they leave.

click to expand

"I think kids who drink shouldn't be allowed to go in and wreck everything for the rest of us," said junior Crysten Hunt, who is O'Sullivan's daughter.

Sounds like they're administering them at the door, prior to entry.

So, I'm a little confused; searching their person and their belongings is ok (not an infringement).. but not a breathalyzer?

It's a school function and the kids are minors. I don't see a problem with them refusing them entrance to the prom if they have been drinking. Parents should be contacted immediately for those who test positive and suspension is appropriate. Since it is a school function, then school rules should apply the same as if they show up to school drunk.

@Cap..I don't know if you understand, they are testing EVERYONE no matter what without probable cause.

Hell..I even agree with searching them before entry for alcohol for safety purposes. However, to force everyone an alcohol breath test on every single student before walking into the event when officers are TRAINED BY EYE for intoxication/and drug use is bullshit.

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that:


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."[1]

Posted by Montgomery

Sounds like they're administering them at the door, prior to entry.

So, I'm a little confused; searching their person and their belongings is ok (not an infringement).. but not a breathalyzer?

No searches. Open wide and blow before you walk in.

BULLSHIT.

Also...YES...SEARCHING IS ALSO AN INFRNGEMENT and states so in the search & seizure laws. HOWEVER, knowing that some teenagers will try to slip alcohol in I would have NO PROBLEM as a parent to search the kids for drugs/alcohol & even weapons before entering the prom.

Posted by LetltB
@Cap..I don't know if you understand, they are testing EVERYONE no matter what without probable cause.

Rephrased:

I don't know if you understand, they are searching EVERYONE no matter what without probable cause.

Posted by LetltBHell..I even agree with searching them before entry for alcohol for safety purposes. However, to force everyone an alcohol breath test on every single student before walking into the event when officers are TRAINED BY EYE for intoxication/and drug use is bullshit.

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that:


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."[1]

click to expand

Again, how is searching their person-- pat downs, going through pockets, purses, etc-- NOT a violation, then?

I think that is actually more intrusive than a breathalyzer.

Having said that, I think it's ridiculous that either of these methods is required; unfortunately, parents who so readily object to such measures would also be the first in line to blame the school when their child causes, or is the victim of, an accident.

I think it all comes down to the school covering its ass, and avoiding potential liability-- and where minors are concerned, I'm pretty certain they can do it without infringing.

Posted by LetltB
Also...YES...SEARCHING IS ALSO AN INFRNGEMENT and states so in the search & seizure laws. HOWEVER, knowing that some teenagers will try to slip alcohol in I would have NO PROBLEM as a parent to search the kids for drugs/alcohol & even weapons before entering the prom.

I didn't see this, but it still stands; both are intrusive, so the fourth doesn't apply here as a defense.

Posted by seraph

This is fine.

But they're minors at a school function.

Constitutional Rights are not applied uniformly in all cases with respect to minors vs. adults, mostly under the principle that children below a certain age are unable to understand fully and consent to the consequences of certain decisions. This usually falls under Parens Patriae doctrine, which is the protective notion of the state.

the parents DISAGREEE and have a right to. Regardless...there is no PROBABLE CAUSE to even search. Minors in the U.S. ARE protected by the 4th amendment. The Parens Patriae doctrine does not apply here.
Search and seizure, due process, and public schools



The mission of public schools is to maximize the academic and social development of their students. In performing that function, occasional misdeeds by youngsters or employees cause districts to investigate violations and mete out punishment.

The situations in which school officials can conduct a search, what level of suspicion is necessary to legally justify it, when contraband can be seized, and what process must precede any consequences are all subject to the U. S. Constitution and the special protections it extends.

The Fourth Amendment prohibits —unreasonable?? searches and seizures. The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause is triggered as the follow-up step, commanding that school officials who plan to discipline a student or employee must first provide the alleged wrongdoer with two rights:

??Specific information about the charges and the evidence behind it.


??A chance to tell his or her side of the story.


That's known in legal circles as —notice and an opportunity to be heard.?? Without following these due process steps, any punishment that is given—no matter how legitimate—can be overturned.

The Fourth Amendment is concerned with privacy and making sure that government entities, such as public schools, do not get overzealous in investigating violations. Investigatory techniques in a school setting often mirror activities used by police officers, but school probes lack the criminal enforcement power.

The Fifth Amendment is concerned with fundamental fairness. It means that school officials cannot hold or punish a student without stating the reason and providing an opportunity to contest the charges. Courts over the years have said that a hearing does not have to be elaborate. When the offense and potential penalty are small, the due process requirement can be met with an informal conversation in the principal??s office. When the offense is great and penalties such as long-term suspension, expulsion, job loss, or referral for criminal charges loom, then a formal, —full-blown?? hearing with an adversarial process and potential legal representation are more in order.

The challenge for school districts and the courts is to balance students?? constitutional rights with the need for safety and preventing violence or disregard for schools rules.

The hurdles erected by the U. S. Constitution??s Fourth and Fifth Amendments are exclusive to the nation??s public schools. Private K-12 institutions have far more leeway to conduct unfettered investigations, withhold findings if they choose, and unceremoniously ask a student or faculty member to leave. Tuition and employment contracts rule private school relationships, while America??s social compact and legal contract (the Constitution) governs how public officials must act.

Situations where the Fourth Amendment (and depending on the results, the Fifth Amendment) might apply:

??Drug testing students in extracurricular activities.


??Drug-sniffing dogs on campus.


??Locker searches and metal detectors.


??Backpacks, wallet, and personal computer searches.


??Searching a student's car in the parking lot.

- See more at: http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Public-education/The-law-and-its-influence-on-public-school-districts-An-overview/Search-and-seizure-due-process-and-public-schools.html#sthash.jzfXIvlj.dpuf<BR>

Posted by Montgomery

Posted by LetltB
Also...YES...SEARCHING IS ALSO AN INFRNGEMENT and states so in the search & seizure laws. HOWEVER, knowing that some teenagers will try to slip alcohol in I would have NO PROBLEM as a parent to search the kids for drugs/alcohol & even weapons before entering the prom.

I didn't see this, but it still stands; both are intrusive, so the fourth doesn't apply here as a defense.

click to expand

Exactly the point....they aren't even going to search, they are going straight to GUILT without probable cause.

Posted by LetltB

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that:


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."[1]

This should apply to adults as well, in that an adult having to give a drug test before participating with an employment agreement should be infringing upon this Amendment.

I do agree with a person being tested if an accident happens because then it's probable cause.

A person trying to get a job, who appears to be of sound mind and judgment shouldn't be deemed guilty without cause.

Posted by LetltB

Posted by Montgomery

Posted by LetltB
Also...YES...SEARCHING IS ALSO AN INFRNGEMENT and states so in the search & seizure laws. HOWEVER, knowing that some teenagers will try to slip alcohol in I would have NO PROBLEM as a parent to search the kids for drugs/alcohol & even weapons before entering the prom.

I didn't see this, but it still stands; both are intrusive, so the fourth doesn't apply here as a defense.

Exactly the point....they aren't even going to search, they are going straight to GUILT without probable cause.

click to expand

If you mean searching without probable cause is no different than giving a breathalyzer without probable cause, then I agree.

Why not have parents sign a waiver stating that the school will not be held liable for anything that occurs off school grounds, instead?

That's what it is about, anyway.

Good idea. They should do breathalyzers at graduation too.

Maybe it'll prevent some of these high school idiots from turning into another bloody and mangled dunk driving statistic strewn all over the road.

Posted by LetltB
@Cap..I don't know if you understand, they are testing EVERYONE no matter what without probable cause.

Hell..I even agree with searching them before entry for alcohol for safety purposes. However, to force everyone an alcohol breath test on every single student before walking into the event when officers are TRAINED BY EYE for intoxication/and drug use is bullshit.

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that:


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."[1]

I perfectly understood. Treat everyone equally. Test everyone. No chance of "playing favorites". Those who are not drinking would have nothing to worry about and should not be offended. Those that are drinking will be dismissed appropriately.

I am a parent of teenagers and I would support it if they tested my kids before prom. Drinking on prom night is notorious.

It's this simple. If a kid doesn't want to have a breathalyzer, they don't have to go to prom. So, they DO have a choice.

Everyone knows how I feel about drunk drivers..which includes teens, their safety @, dances, proms, etc..I get it is a preventative measure. I really do. Some proms aren't even at the schools, it's a venue with halls and banquet rooms of restaurants. However doing this at schools will not STOP them from drinking after either. No different the gun control nuts..who think an attempt at controlling guns is going to stop the problem. Hell just today a kid went to school with a knife and stabbed 20 people in Pennsylvania. 😢

Posted by GetMisted

You don't read very well.

You will only lose your license if you refuse the breath alyzer at the jail. You do not have to submit to a PBT on the roadside and you will not lose you license by doing so.

Not if you have a good lawyer.

Just saying.

Don't drink n' drive, kids. 😛

Posted by LetltB
Everyone knows how I feel about drunk drivers..which includes teens, their safety @, dances, proms, etc..I get it is a preventative measure. I really do. Some proms aren't even at the schools, it's a venue with halls and banquet rooms of restaurants. However doing this at schools will not STOP them from drinking after either. No different the gun control nuts..who think an attempt at controlling guns is going to stop the problem. Hell just today a kid went to school with a knife and stabbed 20 people in Pennsylvania. 😢

It won't stop a thing, you're right.

What's worse, is that it conditions kids for over-acceptance of authority (imo)-- and they just want to have fun, so they'll do it.

They'll find a better way to get around, too. 😉