WPC I-JٖǬqC|;B'bḕa }$#Sx= HkYu7e>(0'QNXpqFti@!LGCwテPlj(C}ǥ.("Dc݈܊a ړB]˰ό"&$_BYKh/ + ndd&&? DVhzT#"x^Q_)vJFIo G6i9z.31E !`-+J?dj\-\+t{$H%i_q7}p*t5]QN٧,넹dB]7_bvrM{8uA3 /̹^zCY@e}QVhyL?OUMB2PPK}X~1;&ypP!J?p7UVQގo#2U1N %I 0(O^ ww4 m 1 1uJ 0c 0C"!e! 0wC( 0(U.J) 1x) 0) 1* 1a+ 0U+=, 1- 1- 0e. 0v. 0)S/ 0|/U@;0 1{0U@1 0B1 01 0l2 0 3 13 0n4 1]5 15 1m6 16 1{7 18 18 09 19 1P: : 1: 1s;N; 0; 0< \= %w= 0= 0C> 0> 0 ? 0 T? 0hR@M@ 0@}A 0CB 0C 0eC 0 D 0D 0hE 1F 0F 0G 0G 05H 0H(I 0I 0J 72/K 0aK 0K 0L B)M 0FM 0MU">VN(NbN$N 0NN6OU'@WOWOWOWOW 0 Y 0<0Z 0lZ [ 0^^ 0__ 0` 0@a 0a 0>b 0b 0c 0d 0e 0f 0zg 0\h 0i 02i 0j 0:k 0YPk 0_k 0 l 0m 0n B*p D/p D+p 0q D/$s 0Ss 06!t 0Wt 0:_u 0^u 0<uU 63vU*iv 0v 0Bw 0w 0x 0z 0:^{ 0{ 0V| 0 e} 0$q~ 0! 0 0ԁ 0 0 0 0. 0*@ 0'j 0$ 0! 0֋ 0 0 0' 0-< 0i 0'x 0$ 0!Ô 0 0 0 05 0 J 0 V 0!_ 0 0 0 0Ѡ 0 0 0  0$ 0!: 0[ 0y 0 0 0 0Ӭ 0 0- 0*' 0'Q 0$x 0! 0 0۵ 0 0- 0*; 0'e 0$ 0! 0ѽ 0 0 0" 07 0*I 0's 0$ 0! 0 0 0 00 0 E 0$Q 0!u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 , 0!5 0V 0t 0 0 0 0 0  0$ 0! 01 0O 0j 0 0 0 0 0- 0* 0'' 0$N 0!r 0 0 0 0 0- 0*) 0'S 0$z 0! 0 0 0 0* 0" 0 0 0R 0  0  0g 0 00 0- 0*# 0'M 0$t 0! 0 0 0 00 0-"  0*O! 0'y" 0$# 0!$ 0% 0' 0( 06) 0-K* 0*x+ 0', 0$- 0!. 00 0,1 0G2 0_3 0'n4 0$5 0!6 07 08 0: 0+; 0@< 0R= 0-g> 0*? 0'@ 0$A 0! C 0*D 0HE 0cF 0{G 0H 0 I 0$J 0!K 0L 0 N 0&O 0>P 0 SQ 0$_R 0!S 0T 0U 0V 0W 0 Y 0Z 0.[ 0F\ 0*[] 0^ 0$_ 0!` 0a 0b 0d 0 e 0$f 0!Bg 0ch 0i 0j 0k 0l 0m 0-n 0*p 0'Dq 0$kr 0!s 0t 0u 0v 0x 1ey 7{y 0By 0By 1e z 7rz B-zU2zU,zU2 {={={={Fr"#ڎrLC4O4i >q 2TTTTTTT 2\\a2\HPLJ5_JLC,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX(${ G, +sing|3|x U 5CEKQW]cioAutoList1I.a.I.I.I.I.I.I.3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(;3$2#  0  .3  0  ($     _\@R3'Letter\_XbXXX_X_Xb*,X, XX*7  Thereisnobasistoassumethatindividualsuspicionbasedsearches  areineffectiveorunworkableinschoolsettings.AsthisCourtnotedin t T.L.O., 8   8  [Publicschoolstudents]spendtheschoolhoursincloseassociation L witheachother,bothintheclassroomandduringrecreational  periods.Thestudentsinaparticularclassoftenknoweachother  andtheirteachersquitewell.Ofnecessity,teachershaveadegree H  offamiliaritywith,andauthorityover,theirstudentsthatis  \ unparalleledexceptperhapsintherelationshipbetweenparentand   child.   Id.at348(Powell,J.,concurring);Seealso,Vernonia,515U.S.at678 X   (O'Connor,J.,dissenting)("Inmostschools,theentirepoolofpotential  l  searchtargets--students--isunderconstantsupervisionbyteachersand  0  administratorsandcoaches,beitinclassrooms,hallways,orlocker   rooms."(citations%  omitted)).SeeJ.NathanJensen,DontRushto h  AbandonASuspicionBasedStandardforSearchesofPublicSchool ,|  Students,2000_B.Y.U._ԀL.Rev.695,709710(2000). @  (O;$0  2#  a  .3  0` (#(#(O2$ !  XXXX  0  <6X9`(Courier CEKQW]cioAutoList2A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#2#  0  )3  0(#(# iEGMSY_ekqAutoList30IIIIA.IIIIIIIIII(zEGMSY_ekqAutoList15A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.*+ (_2623  ..I., II.,Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(EEGMSY_ekqAutoList171.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(EGMSY_ekqAutoList16A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.4#->2Quick I.  .0 *D+D (_25   ," <DL,23  ..," <DL,   ( $*5+5 (_24  ) <DL)23  ..) <DL)  (9 Z(Times New Roman (EGMSY_ekqAutoList18A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.)L  Z(CG Times Regular(b$0  0` (#(#2#   .3  0 ` (#` (#(xir$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#2#(  0  )3  0 (# (#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#2#(  a  )3  0h(#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#2#(   )3  0h(#h(#(eEGMSY_ekqAutoList19IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII({$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#2#  a  )3  0p(#(# "#$%'xAGaeimquy}Bullet ListBullets List(EGMSY_ekqAutoList20IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII(%EGMSY_ekqAutoList21IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII(5EGMSY_ekqAutoList22IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII EGMSY_ekqAutoList121.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. EGMSY_ekqAutoList131.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(jEGMSY_ekqAutoList14A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.*2+2 (_23 ` &<<DL&23  ..&<<DL& ` (EEGMSY_ekqAutoList23IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII(UEGMSY_ekqAutoList241.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.Cases "#$%'hEGKOSW[_cAutoList25)1)a)(uEGMSY_ekqAutoList261.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.*/+/ (_22  #DL#23  ..#DL#  *,+, (_21   DL 23  .. DL  StatutesMiscellaneous*)+) (_20 h DDL23  ..DDL h *&+& (_19  L23  ..L  *#+# (_18   L23  .. L  ( `$!XvXXX0   !XvXXX(,!$0  0` (#(#  (@$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# ` *>> (_17  2( 4 <DL223  Ԁ2( 4 <DL2  A, B,Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5*DD (_16   ," <DL,23  Ԁ," <DL,   *55 (_15  ) <DL)23  Ԁ) <DL)  4#72Quick A.B  .0 B*22 (_14 ` &<<DL&23  Ԁ&<<DL& ` *// (_13  #DL#23  Ԁ#DL#  *,, (_12   DL 23  Ԁ DL   EGMSY_ekqAutoList29A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.*)) (_11 h DDL23  ԀDDL h *&& (_10  L23  ԀL  (## &_9   L23  Ԁ L  (>> &_8  2( 4 <DL223  2( 4 <DL2  (DD &_7   ," <DL,23  ," <DL,   (55 &_6  ) <DL)23  ) <DL)  (22 &_5 ` &<<DL&23  &<<DL& `  i)(// &_4  #DL#23  #DL#  (,, &_3   DL 23   DL  ()) &_2 h DDL23  DDL h  d(&& &_1  L23  L  &## $_   L23   L  \  `&Times New Roman misperceptionA-    (O$ _\@R3'Letter\_XbXXX_X_Xb*,X, XX*4  TheCourthasconsistentlyfollowedthisruleinothercontexts.See,  e.g.,_Nat'l_ԀTreasuryEmployeesUnionv.VonRaab,489U.S.656,674 t (1989)(holdingthatbecauseitis"notfeasibletosubject[customs] 8 employeesandtheirworkproducttothekindofday-to-dayscrutinythat L isthenorminmoretraditionalofficeenvironments,"asuspicion  requirementisimpracticalforsearchesofcustomsofficialsfordrug  impairment);Bellv.Wolfish,441U.S.520,559n.40(1979)(holdingthat H  becauseobservationneededtogainsuspicionwouldcause"obvious  \ disruptionoftheconfidentialityandintimacythatthesevisitsareintended   toafford,"asuspicionrequirementforsearchesofprisonersfor    smugglingfollowingcontactvisitsisimpracticable);UnitedStatesv. X   Martinez-_Fuerte_,428U.S.543,557(1976)("[A]requirementthatstops  l  onmajorinlandroutesalways...basedonreasonablesuspicionwouldbe  0  impracticalbecausetheflowoftraffictendstobetooheavytoallowthe   particularizedstudyofagivencarthatwouldenable%  ittobeidentifiedas h  apossiblecarrierofillegalaliens").SeeJ.NathanJensen,DontRushto ,|  AbandonASuspicionBasedStandardforSearchesofPublicSchool @  Students,2000_B.Y.U._ԀL.Rev.695,709(2000).(9 Z(Times New Roman  _\@R3'Letter\X8XXX XX8*,X,` XX*2  Abriefdescriptionofeachoftheorganizationsandindividualslisted  hereinappearsintheAppendix.#  z##X8X Й#6u h4heading 1   2( 4 <DL2 XXX      2( 4 <DL2  <:Default Para.vs,Title     5+ 4` <DL5XXX    5+ 4` <DL5   _ XX*,X, XX*\@R3'Letter\_ 1  Amicifilethisbriefwiththeconsentofallparties.Lettersofconsent  havebeenlodgedwiththeClerkofCourt.Nocounselforaparty t authoredthisbriefinwholeorinpart.Nopersonorentity,otherthan 8 amici,theirmembers,ortheircounselmadeamonetarycontributionfor L thepreparationorsubmissionofthisbrief.# _ϵ#  #X8X #:bb8Body Text 2   2( 4 <DL2XXX  2( 4 <DL2  <bb:footnote tex   2( 4 <DL2  2( 4 <DL2  0AA.Normal  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  <AA:Definition T  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  <AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(hh&H1  5+ ` hp x 5      5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H2  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H3  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H4  5+ ` hp x 5 XXX 5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H5  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H6  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  2DD0Address  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEK<6X9`(Courier NewKSY\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard K<6X9`(Courier NewKSY\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted  /%  ,Kk %#/K<6X9`(Courier NewKSY\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/  <:zBottom of 7(X7    5+ ` hp x 5?%2A`Arial?  SY\  `&Times New RomanS7(X75+ ` hp x 5  &  d d)1dxd'dxd<:zTop of For7(X7    5+ ` hp x 5?%2A`Arial?  SY\  `&Times New RomanS7(X75+ ` hp x 5  )2dxd0KS.SampleK<6X9`(Courier NewKSY\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterK<6X9`(Courier NewKSY\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  <6X9`(Courier New%2A`Arial<_b:Body Text In   /% 4 <DL/XXX  2( 4 <DL2  <:footnote ref<nn:Body Text I1  X  2( 4 <DL2XXX  2( 4 <DL2 X  <:Body Text 21     2( 4 <DL2 Gu%2A`HelveticaG  SY\  `&Times New RomanS   2( 4 <DL2  0GG.footer    !XXX   !  :8page number0GG.header    !XXX   !  <N+Z :Outline001_1 ` &<<DL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<K+Z :Outline001_2  #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<W+f :Outline001_3 j  #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <T+f :Outline001_4  <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Q+f :Outline001_5   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline001_6 j  L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <K+f :Outline001_7  D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <H+f :Outline001_8    xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline001_9 j    23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+Z :Outline002_1  ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<]+f :Outline002_2  4 ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Z+f :Outline002_3 j  &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <W+f :Outline002_4   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline002_5  <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Q+f :Outline002_6 j  ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <N+f :Outline002_7   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline002_8  D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <H+f :Outline002_9 j   xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <`+f :Outline003_1   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+Z :Outline003_2 ` &<<DL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<Z+f :Outline003_3  " &DL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <W+f :Outline003_4   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline003_5  <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Q+f :Outline003_6 j  ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <N+f :Outline003_7   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline003_8  D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <H+f :Outline003_9 j   xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <K+Z :Outline004_1  #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<H+Z :Outline004_2   DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<T+f :Outline004_3 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline004_4   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline004_5   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline004_6 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <H+f :Outline004_7    xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline004_8     23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline004_9 j L (#%#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <K+Z :Outline005_1  #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<W+f :Outline005_2   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline005_3 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline005_4   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline005_5   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline005_6 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <H+f :Outline005_7    xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline005_8     23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline005_9 j L (#%#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <T+Z :Outline006_1  ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<`+f :Outline006_2   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <]+f :Outline006_3   ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Z+f :Outline006_4   &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <W+f :Outline006_5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline006_6 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline006_7   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline006_8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline006_9 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <`+f :Outline007_1   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <]+f :Outline007_2  4 ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Z+f :Outline007_3 j  &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <W+f :Outline007_4   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline007_5  <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Q+f :Outline007_6 j  ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <N+f :Outline007_7   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline007_8  D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <H+f :Outline007_9 j   xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+Z :Outline008_1  ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<]+f :Outline008_2  4 ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Z+f :Outline008_3 j  &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <W+f :Outline008_4   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline008_5  <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Q+f :Outline008_6 j  ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <N+f :Outline008_7   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline008_8  D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <H+f :Outline008_9 j   xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <K+Z :Outline009_1  #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<W+f :Outline009_2   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline009_3 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline009_4   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline009_5   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline009_6 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <H+f :Outline009_7    xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline009_8     23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline009_9 j L (#%#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <K+Z :Outline010_1  #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<H+Z :Outline010_2   DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<T+f :Outline010_3 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline010_4   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline010_5   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline010_6 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <H+f :Outline010_7    xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline010_8     23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline010_9 j L (#%#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <K+Z :Outline011_1  #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<W+f :Outline011_2   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline011_3 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline011_4   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline011_5   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline011_6 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <H+f :Outline011_7    xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline011_8     23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline011_9 j L (#%#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <T+Z :Outline012_1  ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<`+f :Outline012_2   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <]+f :Outline012_3 j 4 ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Z+f :Outline012_4   &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <W+f :Outline012_5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline012_6 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline012_7   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline012_8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline012_9 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <W+Z :Outline013_1  /%` ` <DL/23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<`+f :Outline013_2   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <]+f :Outline013_3 j  ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Z+f :Outline013_4  ` &<<DL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <W+f :Outline013_5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline013_6 j   DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline013_7  h DDL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline013_8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <?+Z :Outline013_9 j  L23  ..2( 4 <DL2 j <]+f :Outline014_1  4 ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  < :Outline014_2   &hhDL&K<6X9`(Courier NewK23  SY\  `&Times New RomanSK<6X9`(Courier NewK..SY\  `&Times New RomanS  2( 4 <DL2  < :Outline014_3   #DL#GsKr`WingdingsG23  SY\  `&Times New RomanSGsKr`WingdingsG..SY\  `&Times New RomanS  2( 4 <DL2  < :Outline014_4  <  DL At(\ Y`SymbolA23  SY\  `&Times New RomanSAt(\ Y`SymbolA..SY\  `&Times New RomanS  2( 4 <DL2  < :Outline014_5   ppLK<6X9`(Courier NewK23  SY\  `&Times New RomanSK<6X9`(Courier NewK..SY\  `&Times New RomanS  2( 4 <DL2  < :Outline014_6   LGsKr`WingdingsG23  SY\  `&Times New RomanSGsKr`WingdingsG..SY\  `&Times New RomanS  2( 4 <DL2  < :Outline014_7  D    LAt(\ Y`SymbolA23  SY\  `&Times New RomanSAt(\ Y`SymbolA..SY\  `&Times New RomanS  2( 4 <DL2  < :Outline014_8    xxK<6X9`(Courier NewK23  SY\  `&Times New RomanSK<6X9`(Courier NewK..SY\  `&Times New RomanS  2( 4 <DL2  < :Outline014_9     GsKr`WingdingsG23  SY\  `&Times New RomanSGsKr`WingdingsG..SY\  `&Times New RomanS  2( 4 <DL2  <c+f :Outline015_1  X /%4 4 <DL/23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <`+f :Outline015_2   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <]+f :Outline015_3 j  ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Z+f :Outline015_4  ` &<<DL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <W+f :Outline015_5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline015_6 j   DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline015_7  h DDL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline015_8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <?+Z :Outline015_9 j  L23  ..2( 4 <DL2 j <c+f :Outline016_1   /%` ` <DL/23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <`+f :Outline016_2   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <]+f :Outline016_3 j 4 ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Z+f :Outline016_4   &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <W+f :Outline016_5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline016_6 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline016_7   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline016_8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline016_9 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <T+Z :Outline017_1  ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<`+f :Outline017_2   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <]+f :Outline017_3 j 4 ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Z+f :Outline017_4   &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <W+f :Outline017_5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline017_6 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline017_7   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline017_8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline017_9 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <N+Z :Outline018_1 ` &<<DL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<Z+f :Outline018_2   &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <W+f :Outline018_3 j  #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <T+f :Outline018_4  <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Q+f :Outline018_5   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline018_6 j  L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <K+f :Outline018_7  D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <H+f :Outline018_8    xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline018_9 j    23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <T+Z :Outline019_1  ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<`+f :Outline019_2   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <]+f :Outline019_3 j 4 ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Z+f :Outline019_4   &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <W+f :Outline019_5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline019_6 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline019_7   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline019_8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline019_9 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+Z :Outline020_1  ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<N+Z :Outline020_2 ` &<<DL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<K+Z :Outline020_3 N #**DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<W+f :Outline020_4   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline020_5  <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Q+f :Outline020_6 j  ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <N+f :Outline020_7   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline020_8  D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <H+f :Outline020_9 j   xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <K+Z :Outline021_1  #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<W+f :Outline021_2   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline021_3 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline021_4   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline021_5   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline021_6 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <H+f :Outline021_7    xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline021_8     23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline021_9 j L (#%#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <W+Z :Outline022_1  /%` ` <DL/23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<T+Z :Outline022_2  ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<]+f :Outline022_3 j  ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <N+Z :Outline022_4  &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<W+f :Outline022_5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline022_6 j   DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline022_7  h DDL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline022_8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <?+Z :Outline022_9 j  L23  ..2( 4 <DL2 j <K+Z :Outline023_1  #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2<W+f :Outline023_2   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline023_3 j <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <Q+f :Outline023_4   ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <N+f :Outline023_5   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline023_6 j D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <H+f :Outline023_7    xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline023_8     23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <E+f :Outline023_9 j L (#%#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <`+f :Outline024_1   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <]+f :Outline024_2  4 ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Z+f :Outline024_3 j  &hhDL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <W+f :Outline024_4   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <T+f :Outline024_5  <  DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <Q+f :Outline024_6 j  ppL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j <N+f :Outline024_7   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <K+f :Outline024_8  D    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  <H+f :Outline024_9 j   xx23  ..  2( 4 <DL2 j 6789:;<= 35;AGMSY_1A.a.i.1.a.i.1.a.l>i.("$ !  ("$ !   35;AGMSY_21.a.i.1.a.i.1.a.pi.)Hairline dKr`Wingdings(\ Y`Symbol%2A`Helvetica _ XX\@R3'Letter\_ *,X,XX*3  Recentexperiencewithsuspicionlessdrugtestingofchildrenby  publicschoolofficialshasprovenwrongtheCourtsconclusionthat t  testingbasedonsuspicionofdrugusewouldnotbebetter,butworse 8 thanthesuspicionlesssearches,andjustifiedthedissentssharp L disagreement.SeeVernonia,515U.S.646,66364,and672(OConnor,  J.,dissenting).TheCourtwasconcernedtheindividualizedtestingwould   generate[]theexpenseofdefendinglawsuitsthatchargesucharbitrary H   imposition,orthatsimplydemandgreaterprocessbeforeaccusatorydrug  testingisimposed.SeeVernonia,515U.S.at66364.Inthenameof t reducingunnecessarylitigation,thesuspicionlesstestinghasresultedin 8 cloggedfederaldocketsinordertodefinewhatcircumstancesconstitutea L  specialneed.TheTenthCircuitobservedthisproblem:inthe  suspicionlesssearchcontext, theSupremeCourt'sspecialneedscases  haveengenderedsomecriticismforfailingtoadequatelydefinewhata H  specialneedis.SeeEarls,at1269&n.3,citingRobertD._Dodson_,Ten  \ YearsofRandomizedJurisprudence:AmendingtheSpecialNeeds   Doctrine,51S.C.L.Rev.258,261(Winter2000).# _ϙ##X8X # _ XX\@R3'Letter\_ *,X,` XX*5  # _ϙ#Certainaspectsofthedrugtestingpolicyweresustainedonlyonthe  basisofstare_decisis_,underToddv.RushCountySchools,133F.3d984 t (7thCir.1998),inwhichtheappealscourtdidnotapplytheVernonia 8 analysis.#X8X # <_ XX\@R3'Letter\_ *,X, XX*6  # _ϙ#Aschoolsdrugtestingpolicyisnotinsulatedfromreviewmerely  becauseitprovidesforindividualized,suspicionbasedtesting.In t TrinidadSch.Dist.No.1v.Lopez,963P.2d1095(Co.1998),thepolicy 8  atissuemandateddrugtestingforallstudentsingradessixthrough  twelvewhowantedtoparticipateinanextracurricularactivity. In t additiontothemandatedtesting,thePolicyallowsofficialstotestany 8 studentparticipatinginanextracurricularactivitybasedonareasonable L suspicionthatthestudentisundertheinfluenceofillicitdrugs/alcohol.  Id.AmorecomprehensivedrugtestingpolicywasatissueinTheodore  v.DelawareValleySch.Dist.,761A.2d652,148Ed.LawRep.985, H  (_Cmwlth_.Ct.2000).There,fivedifferenttypesofdrugtestingwere  \ authorizedbythepolicy.Seeid.at654&n.5.Ineachcase,theappellate   courtscrutinizedthepoliciesundertheVernoniaanalysis,eventhough    thepoliciesbothcontainedtheseprovisions.ThatTecumsehspolicy X   authorizesindividualized,suspicionbasedsearches,therefore,doesnot  l  satisfytherequirementsofVernoniaandChandler.#X8X # _\@R3'Letter\ XX_ *,X, XX*8  # _ϙ#Itnoted, Therearenoacademicsanctionsimposed.SeeEarlsv.  Bd.ofEduc.ofTecumsehPublicSch.Dist.,242F.3d1264,1286(10th t Cir.2001). 8 #X8X z# _*,X,` XX*\@R3'Letter\ XX90  Seenote9,supra.#X8X Ф# _ XX\@R3'Letter\*,X, XX*_ 10  # _#Theonlyauthoritysupportingafindingofimmediacyontherecord  inEarlsisMillerbyMillerv.Wilkes,172F.3d574(8thCir.2000). t There,theappealscourtnoted, 8   8  thereisnotthesameimmediacyhereastherewasinVernonia,and L thisiswherethefactsbeforeusdiffermostsignificantlyfromthose  theSupremeCourtfacedwhendeclaringVernoniasdrugtesting  policyconstitutional.ThereisnoimmediatecrisisinCaveCity H  PublicSchools,indeedthereisnorecordevidenceofanydrugor  \ alcoholproblemintheschools8   Id.at58081.Inspiteofthesefindings,theappealscourtheldthat the    considerableriskofimmediateharmoncetheproblemsurfacesis X   enoughimmediacytosustainthepolicy.Id.Thisholdingis  l  irreconcilablewithVernonia,wheretheCourtheldthat findingsofneed  0  orimmediacyisthe mostsignificantelementwherethe governments   responsibilities,underapublicschoolsystem,asguardianandtutorof h  childrenentrustedtoitscareareimplicated.SeeVernonia,515U.S.at ,|  665.Asaresult,Wilkesshouldnotbeappliedheretoreversetheappeals @  courtsdecision.#X8X # _ XX\@R3'Letter\*,X,XX*_ 11  Since1997,youthcrimeinOklahomahasfallen20percent.Stateof  Oklahoma,UniformCrimeReport,AnnualReport2000,OklahomaState t BureauofInvestigation,at6566(2001),4 ]O  5  www.osbi.state.ok.us/crimestats6]O  7 . 8 OfficialOklahomacrimestatisticsshowthatcrimebyjuveniles(persons L underage18)todayislessfrequentthantenyearsago.Id.(comparing  juvenilearresttotalsbetween1991and2000).In2000,juvenilesonly  accountedfor15.6%ofallpersonsarrestedforallcrimesinOklahoma. H  9 Id.    # _#Morebroadly,therehasbeenacontinuingdeclinenationwideinthe t rateandnumberofyoutharrestedforseriousviolentoffenses(criminal 8 homicide,robbery,aggravatedassaultandforciblerape).U.S._Dept_.of L Justice,Fed.BureauofInvest.,CrimeintheUnitedStates:Uniform  CrimeReports(2000,1998,1993).Juvenilehomiciderates,inparticular,  havedropped56percentfrom1993through1998.Id.Alltotaled,there H  hasbeena30percentdropinthetotaljuvenilecrimerate.Id.;Seealso  \ U.S._Dept_.ofHealth&HumanServices,YouthViolence:AReportofthe   SurgeonGeneral,1731(2001).      NoevidencesuggestsTecumsehdivergesfromthesestateand X   nationaltrends.#X8X #    http://www.osbi.state.ok.us/crimestats/crimestats.html). 9_*,X, XX*\@R3'Letter\ XX_ 12  SeeBriefofAmiciCuriaeinSupportofPetitioners,DrugFree  SchoolsCoalitionetal.,at6&n.3(citingnumerousfederalandstate t courtdecisionssince1995reviewingdrugandalcoholtestinginschools). 8 #_XbX_Ϥ# _\@R3'Letter\ XX*,X,` XX*_ 13  Tecumsehsdrugpolicywouldnothavepreventedthewidely  reported,andmostfearinducingschoolshootingsinWestPaducah t Kentucky;Jonesboro,Arkansas;_Edinboro_,Pennsylvania;Springfield, 8 Oregon;andLittleton,Colorado.Noneofthestudentshootersinthose L instancesreportedlytookoruseddrugs.Schoolsseekingtoemploy  suspicionlesssearchesofvirtuallyallstudents# _#_ foranyandallillicitdrug  useinordertominimizeviolenceshouldestablishacausalconnection H  betweenthetwo.Constitutionalimperativesthatprotectindividualrights  \ mustnotgivewaytosolutionsthatoffermerelycosmeticsecurity.# _ ##X8X z# _\@R3'Letter\ XX_ *,X,` XX*14  Comparisonsofthecurrent_NCES_Ԁsurveydatawithresultsfroman  earliersurveyofpublicschoolprincipalsconductedin1991show t virtuallynochangesacrosseitherminormisbehaviorormoreserious 8 infractions. Notedschoolviolenceresearcher,IrwinHyman,trackeda L numberofindicatorsofschoolviolenceoverthepast20yearsand  concluded,"Aswasthecase20yearsago,despitepublicperceptionsto  thecontrary,thecurrentdatadonotsupporttheclaimthattherehasbeen H  adramatic,overallincreaseinschoolbasedviolenceinrecentyears."  \ IrwinA.HymanandDonnaC._Perone_,TheOtherSideofSchool   Violence:EducatorPoliciesandPracticesThatMayContributeto    StudentMisbehavior,30JournalofSchoolPsychology7 ,9(1998);see X   alsoRussell_Skiba_Ԁ&_Reece_ԀPeterson,TheDarkSideofZeroTolerance:  l  CanPunishmentLeadtoSafeSchools?80PhiDelta_Kappan_Ԁ372(1999).# _ϙ#_ #_XbX_z#<http://www.cjcj.org/sss> _*,X, XX* XX\@R3'Letter\_ 15  MonitoringtheFuturesurveyresultsarereportedannuallyinAnn  _Pastore_Ԁ&KathleenMaguire,_eds_.,U.S._Dept_.OfJustice,Bureauof t JusticeStatistics,# _#_ _Sourcebook_ԀofCriminalJusticeStatistics.#_XbX_:#<http://www.cjcj.org/sss> _ XX\@R3'Letter\_ *,X, XX*16  Theterm zerotolerancereferstothosepolicieswhichdealout  severepunishmentforalloffenses,nomatterhowminor,ostensiblyinan t efforttotreatalloffendersalikeinthespiritoffairnessandintoleranceof 8 rulebreaking.See,e.g.,Russell_Skiba_Ԁ&_Reece_ԀPeterson,TheDarkSide L ofZeroTolerance:CanPunishmentLeadtoSafeSchools?80PhiDelta  _Kappan_Ԁ372(1999)(discussingtheoriginsofzerotolerance);seealso  Russell_Skiba_,IndianaEducationalPolicyCenter# _ϙ#_ ,ZeroTolerance,Zero H  Evidence:AnAnalysisofSchoolDisciplinaryPractice(Aug.2000).The  \ useofzerotolerancepoliciesbeganwithfederalandstatecourtdrug   enforcementagenciesintheearly1980s.By1988,theseprogramshad    receivednationalattentionwhentheU.S.governmentallowedcustoms X   agentstoseizetheboats,automobilesandpassportsofanypersons  l  crossingAmericanborderswhowerefoundwitheventraceamountsof  0   drugs.TheU.S.CustomsAgencyfinallyhalteditspolicyin1990.    In1993schoolboardsacrossthecountybeganadoptingzero t tolerancepolicies.In1994thefederalgovernmentsteppedintomandate 8 thepolicynationallywithpassageoftheGunFreeSchoolsActintolaw. L 20U.S.C.8921.Thelawmandatesaonecalendaryearexpulsionfor  possessionofafirearmandreferraltothecriminalorjuvenilejustice  systems.Originallythelawcoveredonlyfirearms,butmorerecent H  amendmentshavebroadenedthelanguagetoincludeanyinstrumentthat  \ maybeusedasaweapon.Thezerotolerancepoliciesinschoolsnow   embracenotonlytheissuesaddressedbytheGunFreeSchoolsAct,but    arealsousedtodisciplinestudentswho disruptclasses,infra.  p #_XbX_# _ XX\@R3'Letter\*,X, XX*_ 17  Definingzerotoleranceasapolicythatmandatespredetermined  consequencesorpunishmentsforspecifiedoffenses,theNationalCenter t forEducationStatisticsreport,Violence&DisciplineProblemsinU.S. 8 PublicSchools:19961997,foundthat94%ofallschoolshavezero L tolerancepoliciesforpossessionofweaponsorfirearms,87%for  possessionofalcohol,while79%reportmandatorysuspensionsor  expulsionsforviolenceorpossessionoftobacco.S.Heavisideetal., H  supra.#_XbX_# g_\@R3'Letter\ XX*,X,` XX*18  Effortstoaddressschoolsafetyhavesweptmillionsofschool  childrenintoanetofexclusionfromeducationalopportunities.Despite t relativelystableratesofassaultswithandwithoutweaponsinschools 8 nationwideoverthepast23years,suspensionsandexpulsionsareat L recordhighs.Between1974and1998,therateatwhichstudentswere  suspendedandexpelledfromschoolshasalmostdoubledfrom3.7%of  studentsin1974(1.7millionsuspended),to6.8%ofstudentsin1998(3.2 H  millionsuspended).LloydJohnstonetal.,U.S._Dept_.OfEducation,  \ ProjectedStudentSuspensionRatefortheNationssPublicSchools   (2000).#X8X z#Document0zzSDUNumber35Document0zzSDUNumber36 !  __XbXXX(     *,X,XX*No.01332  __________________________________  @@' INTHE 4 @@ SUPREMECOURTOFTHEUNITEDSTATES  p   @ ___________________________________  \     BoardofEducationofTecumsehPublic   SchoolDistrictEtAl.,        4  `       <  h   Petitioners,    @ v.   LindsayEarlsand_Lacey_ԀEarls,minors,bytheirnext  p  friendsandparents,JohnDavidandLoriEarls,EtAl.,  \  V     4  `       <  h   Respondents. H  @X_________________________________ 4  :@ X@@ XOnWritofCertioraritothe   @&&XUnitedStatesCourtofAppealsfortheTenthCircuit   @ X__________________________________ p  ^@XXX   BriefofJuvenileLawCenter;Advocatesfor  ChildrenofNewYork;Children&FamilyJustice  Center;EducationLawCenterNJ;EducationLaw  CenterPA;JusticePolicyInstitute;Juvenile  JusticeProjectofLouisiana;JuvenileRights x AdvocacyProject;NationalCenterforYouth d Law;TheSentencingProject;Universityofthe P DistrictofColumbia,JuvenileLawClinic;Youth < LawCenter;andLawProfessorsTheresa_Glennon_, (x MartinGuggenheim,RandyHertz,WallaceJ. d _Mlyniec_,FrancineSherman&Joseph_Tulman_Ԁas P AMICICURIAE < InSupportofRespondents  $   ____________________________@@ X__________ @  @  @  @  @D  @p  @  @          4  `      MarshaL.Levick[ d        4  ` 0 0  0  0  LavalS.MillerWilsonP!!      4  `      BrentA.Cossrow <""      4  `      JUVENILELAWCENTER (#x#      4  `      1315WalnutStreet,Suite400 $d$      4  `      Philadelphia,PA19107 %P %      4  `      (215)6250551   %!  >!(0  0    I.0INDIVIDUAL,SUSPICIONBASEDSEARCHES  D  OFSTUDENTSBYPUBLICSCHOOLTEACHERS 0  SHOULDNOTBEABANDONEDINFAVOROF   BLANKET,SUSPICIONLESSSEARCHES#2.PP/#3>!(C݌   Ќ  >!  >!0  0    >!݌  Ќ  ?  ?l0  004    A.0444ThePolicyIsUnconstitutionalBecauseThe   GovernmentDidNotEstablishThat | Individualized,SuspicionBasedSearchesWere h NotFeasibleBeforeImplementingSuspicionLess T DrugTestingOfChildrenThatParticipateIn @ ExtraCurricularActivities.#2.-44#5?l݌ ,| Ќ  ?  ?0  004    B.0444ThePrivacyInterestsatIssueHereAreGreater T thanThoseThatWereIntrudeduponinVernonia.?݌@44 Ќ  ?  ?0  004    #881.44#10?݌ , Ќ  ?  ?0  004    C.0444TheNatureOfTheIntrusionIsUnreasonable  BecauseItsConsequencesDepriveStudentsOf  TheOpportunityToLearn,EarnAcademic  Credits,AndEnrollInClasses.#881.144#13?݌ x Ќ  ?  ?0  004    D.0444TheTenthCircuitCorrectlyHeldThatThe P! SchoolDistrictsConcernIsNotImmediate <"  BecauseThereIsNoIllegal DrugCrisis, (#x!  RebellionOrDramaticallyIncreasedDrug#881."";44#16?݌ $d" Ќ   %P # >!  >!0  0    II.0ANINFLATEDFEAROFSCHOOLVIOLENCE  DOESNOTJUSTIFYMASS,SUSPICIONLESS  SEARCHESFORNONVIOLENTBEHAVIOR#881.nn0#20>!݌  Ќ  ?  ? !0  004    A.0444ThePerceptionThatSchoolsAreIncreasingly ` ViolentandThatOurChildrenandTeachersAre L  NotSafeIsatOddsWithEvidenceShowingThat 8  SchoolsAreAmongtheSafestPlacestoBe.#881.;44#23? !$!݌ $ t Ќ  ?  ?"0  004    B.0444IfPermitted,GeneralizedDrugTestingofEvery  L  PublicSchoolStudentWillBecomeAsRoutine  8  &InflexibleasOther ZeroToleranceMeasures $  ThatPunishChildrenByDeprivingThemof   SchoolInvolvement.   #881.4444#26?"#݌   Ќ  =`X. XX_Xb!X X XX.  #!X X X!X.#X8X X!X=`%0     CONCLUSION#881. #30=`%%݌ t Ќ_XbXXX8_XbXX_Xb  APPENDIX  1.1A L #!X XX_Xb%#_XbX X!X  `   \TABLEOFAUTHORITIES       FEDERALCASES     ..3x (#,X,X3Bellv.Wolfish,441U.S.520(1979).....................................7 ` H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'Brooksv.EastChambersSch.District,730F.Supp. 8  759(S.D.Tex.1989),aff'd..............................................12,19 $ t H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'Chandlerv.Miller,520U.S.305(1997)................4,6,7,8,9  L  H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'Earlsv.BoardofEducationofTecumsehPublic $  Sch.District,242F.3d1264(10thCir.2001)    @ ..................................................4,6,12,13,15,16,18,20,21   -x (#xX-Ӏ   -x (#xX-Earlsv.BoardofEducationofTecumsehPublic   Sch.District,115F.Supp.2d1281(W.D.Okla.2000) p  @ ...........................................................................15,16,17,20 \ H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'_Elkins_Ԁv.UnitedStates,364U.S.206(1960).........................3 4 H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'Joyv.PennHarrisMadisonSch.Corp.,212F.3d1052  \ (7thCir.2000).........................................................8,9,12,18 H H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'MillerbyMillerv.Wilkes,172F.3d574(8thCir.2000).....21   H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'NationalTreasuryEmployeesUnionv.VonRaab,489U.S.  656(1989)...............................................................................7  H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'NewJerseyv.T.L.O.,469U.S.325(1985)................2,3,5,9 l H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'Skinnerv.RailwayLaborExecutives'Association,489U.S. D! 602(1989)..............................................................................3 0"  H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'_Tannahill_Ԁv._Lockney_,133F.Supp.2d919(N.D.Tex. $X" 2001)..............................................................................12,19 $D # -x (#xX-Thomasv.Roberts,261F.3d1160(11thCir.2001)............20  -x (#xX-Thompsonv.CarthageSch.District,87F.3d979(8th  Cir.1996)........................................................................19,20 t H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'Tinkerv.DesMoinesIndependentCommunitySch. L  District,393U.S.503(1969)...................................11,13,14 8  H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'Toddv.RushCountySchools,133F.3d984(7thCir.1998)  ` ................................................................................................8  L  H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'UnitedStatesv.Martinez_Fuerte_,428U.S.543 $  (1976).....................................................................................7   H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'VernoniaSch.District47Jv.Acton,515   U.S.646(1995).........2,3,4,5,6,9,11,13,-x (#xX-16,17,18,21,23   H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'WillisbyWillisv.AndersonCommunitySch.Corp., \ 158F.3d415(7thCir.1998)....................................7,8,9,12 H H.` hp x (#xXH @ XSTATECASES   p 'x (#X'InreF.B.,726A.2d361(Pa.1999).....................................19 H H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'InInterestofS.S.,452Pa.Super.15,680A.2d1172   (Pa.Super.1996)............................................................19,21   H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'Theodorev.DelawareValleySch.District,761A.2d652,  148Ed.LawRep.985(_Cmwlth_.Ct.2000)......................9,12  H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'TrinidadSch.DistrictNo.1v.Lopez,963 X  P.2d1095(Co.1998)...............................9,12,14,15,16,17 D! H.` hp x (#xXH @= = XFEDERALSTATUTES  #l! 'x (#X'GunFreeSchoolsAct,20U.S.C.8921.......................28,29 $D # H.` hp x (#xXH@ X MISCELLANEOUS   'x (#X'J.NathanJensen,Don'tRushtoAbandonASuspicionBased  StandardforSearchesofPublicSchoolStudents,2000 t _B.Y.U.L._ԀRev.695,709(2000)...........................................7,9 ` H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'JusticePolicyInst.,SchoolHouseHype:TheSchool 8  Shootings,andtheRealRisksKidsFaceinAmerica $ t (1999)...................................................................................27  ` H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'JusticePolicyInstitute,SchoolsandSuspensions:  8  SelfReportedCrimeandtheGrowingUseof $  Suspensions(2001)...............................................................26   H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'NancyD._Brener_Ԁetal.,RecentTrendsinViolenceRelated   BehaviorsAmongHighSchoolStudents..............................24   H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'U.S._Dep't_ԀofHealthandHumanServices,YouthViolence: \ AReportoftheSurgeonGeneral(2001)..................22,24,27 H H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'Vincent_Schiraldi_Ԁ&Jason_Ziedenberg_,HowDistorted  p CoverageofJuvenileCrimeAffectsPublicPolicy,in  \ ZeroTolerance:ResistingtheDriveforPunishmentin H OurSchools(William_Ayers_Ԁetal.,_eds_.,2001)....................22 4 H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'IrwinA.HymanandDonnaC._Perone_,TheOtherSideof   SchoolViolence:EducatorPoliciesandPracticesThat  MayContributetoStudentMisbehavior,30Journalof  SchoolPsychology(1998)....................................................26  H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'Russell_Skiba_Ԁ&_Reece_ԀPeterson,TheDarkSideof X  ZeroTolerance:CanPunishmentLeadtoSafe D! Schools?80PhiDelta_Kappan_Ԁ372(1999)...............26,27,28 0"  H.` hp x (#xXH'x (#X'U.S.SupremeCourtOfficialTranscriptofOralArgument, $X" Vernoniav.Acton,1995WL353412(1995)..........................5H.` hp x (#xXH $D # \ \ \  $, XX$  @i i XINTERESTOFTHEAMICIg   1          Q  Theorganizationsandindividualssubmittingthisbrief P workwithandonbehalfofadolescents,particularlyyoung < peopleintheeducationandjusticesystems.Someprovide (x servicesdirectlytoyouth,someareengagedinresearchand  d someareassociationsofprofessionalswhoworkwithyouth.  P Amiciapproachtheissuesinthiscasefromavarietyof  < perspectiveseducation,juvenilejustice,childwelfare,  ( researchandpolicydevelopmentbutareunitedintheir    concernaboutpreservingrespondentscivilrights.Theschool   contextalonedoesnotjustifymandatory,suspicionless,   urinalysisdrugtestinguponallparticipantsinanyschoolextra   curricularactivity.AmiciurgetheCourtnottoabandona t  suspicionbasedstandardforsearchesofpublicschoolstudents, `  andprovidetheCourtwithanextensivebodyofsocialscience L  researchaboutschoolsafety. 8 @f f XIdentityofAmiciCuriae`d   2      ׈     `   JuvenileLawCenter;AdvocatesforChildrenofNewYork; L Children&FamilyJusticeCenter;EducationLawCenterNJ; 8 EducationLawCenterPA;JusticePolicyInstitute;Juvenile $ JusticeProjectofLouisiana;JuvenileRightsAdvocacyProject;  NationalCenterforYouthLaw;TheSentencingProject;  UniversityoftheDistrictofColumbia,JuvenileLawClinic;  YouthLawCenter;andLawProfessorsTheresa_Glennon_,  MartinGuggenheim,RandyHertz,Wallace_Mlyniec_,Francine p Sherman&Joseph_Tulman_.  \ @7 7 X SUMMARYOFARGUMENT   wZ  In1995,thisCourtupheldaprogramforrandomurinalysis P drugtestingofstudentathletesuponfindingevidencethatthe < schoolwasina stateofrebellionanddisciplineactionshad (x reached epidemicproportions.VernoniaSch.Dist.47Jv.  d Acton,515U.S.646,649(1995).InthewakeofVernonia,  P Petitioner,theTecumsehSchoolDistrict,decidedtodrugtest  < almostitsentirestudentbodywithoutactuallysuspectingthat  ( anyparticularstudentconsumesillicitdrugs.Giventhecareful    linedrawnbythisCourtinVernonia,theTecumsehSchool   Districtiswrongtoassumecourtswouldendorsedrugtesting   ofstudentsengagedinnodangerousactivitiesandwithno   historyofdruguse. t    Vernoniamustnotbeinterpretedascondoninganythingbut L  suspicionlesssearchesofstudentathleteswhoareknowntobe 8 leadersofawelldocumentedandextremedrugproblemamong $t thestudentbody.WhentheuniquecircumstancesofVernonia ` arenotpresent,anindividualizedsuspicionstandard,based L uponthisCourtsholdinginNewJerseyv.T.L.O.,469U.S.325 8 (1985),mustbefollowed.InaccordancewithT.L.O.,asearch $ ofapublicschoolstudentbyaschoolofficialisconstitutionally  permissibleonly whentherearereasonablegroundsfor  suspectingthatthesearchwillturnupevidencethatthestudent  hadviolatedorisviolatingeitherthelawortherulesofthe  school.Id.at342. p   Amicirecognizethatpreservinganorderlyschool H environmentmayentaileasingrestrictionstowhichsearchesby 4 publicauthoritiesareordinarilysubject,id.at33940,but  p unsupportedfearofstudentmisbehaviordoesnotjustify  !\ abandoningthetenantsofT.L.O.Nationalstatistics !H  demonstratethattherehasbeenasignificantreductionin "4! juvenilecrimeoverthepastseveralyears.Nevertheless, # " isolatedincidentsofextremeviolencehaveexaggeratedtherisk $ # ofschoolcrime,andsetintomotionastringof zerotolerance % $ policesandproceduresthatfailtomakeschoolssaferandlead  totheunnecessaryexclusionofstudentsfromtheeducational  process.Particularlywherethereisnoallegationofschool  violenceinTecumseh,popularmisconceptionsaboutyouth t crimeshouldnot,atanylevel,justifyamorerestrictivethan ` necessaryformulationofFourthAmendmentrights. L  @  X ARGUMENT $ t PI.0  INDIVIDUAL,SUSPICIONBASEDSEARCHESOF  L  STUDENTSBYPUBLICSCHOOLTEACHERS  8  SHOULDNOTBEABANDONEDINFAVOROF $  BLANKET,SUSPICIONLESSSEARCHES  h   TheFourthAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitution h  providesthattheFederalGovernmentshallnotviolate [_t]he_ T  rightofthepeopletobesecureintheirpersons,houses,papers, @ andeffects,againstunreasonablesearchesandseizures....This ,| CourthasheldthattheFourteenthAmendmentextendsthis h constitutionalguaranteetosearchesandseizuresbystate T officers,see_Elkins_Ԁv.UnitedStates,364U.S.206(1960), @ includingpublicschoolofficials,NewJerseyv.T.L.O.,469 , U.S.325,336337(1985).InSkinnerv.RailwayLabor  Executives'Assn.,489U.S.602,617(1989),theCourtheldthat  statecompelledcollectionandtestingofurine,suchasthat  requiredbythedrugtestingpolicy(Policy)enactedbythe  TecumsehSchoolDistrict(Tecumseh),isa searchsubjectto x thedemandsoftheFourthAmendment. d m  AsthetextoftheFourthAmendmentindicates,theultimate T measureoftheconstitutionalityofagovernmentalsearchis @  reasonableness.SeeVernoniaSch.Dist.47Jv.Acton,515  , U.S.646,65253(1995). TobereasonableundertheFourth !  Amendment,asearchordinarilymustbebasedon "! individualizedsuspicionofwrongdoing.SeeChandlerv. #" Miller,620U.S.305,315(1997).Rareexceptionstothisrule $# arewarrantedwhenthegovernmentestablishestheexistenceof x% $  specialneeds.Seeid.Whetheraparticularsearchmeetsthe  reasonablenessstandardinthesecircumstances isjudgedby  balancing itsintrusionontheindividualsFourthAmendment  interestsagainstitspromotionoflegitimategovernmental x interests.SeeVernonia,515U.S.at65253.Inorderto fit d withinthecloselyguardedcategoryofconstitutionally P  permissiblesuspicionlesssearches,thegovernmentmust <  show: ( x r8  1.0A specialneedor findingofneedinthepublic    schoolsetting,whichthisCourthascharacterizedas    the mostsignificantelementinthisanalysis;and  *t8  2.0Thatthenatureoftheprivacyinterestisoutweighed @  bythenatureoftheintrusion,thenatureand ,|  immediacyofthegovernmentalconcern,andnature h  andefficacyofthesearch.T uSeeChandler,620U.S.at308;Vernonia,515U.S.at65253.  Thegovernmentsfailuretocarryitsburdeninmakingeither  oneofthesetwoshowingsisanindependentbasisuponwhich | acourtmuststrikedownamass,suspicionlessdrugtestas h unreasonable. T (w  AnalysisdemonstratesthattheTenthCircuitCourtof D AppealsheldcorrectlythatTecumsehconfrontedaless 0 emergentsituationthantheschooldistrictfacedinVernonia.  Tecumsehoverreactedbyimplementingitsmass,suspicionless  drugtestingpolicywithoutfirstestablishingthat  individualized,suspicionbasedtestingwasnotfeasible.The  testingwasimposeduponeverystudentwhoparticipatedinan | extracurricularactivity,includingmany_nona__thletes_.This h  meantthattheprivacyinterestsintrudeduponweregreaterthan T!  thoseatissueinVernonia.ThesefactorsdistinguishEarls @"! fromVernonia,andestablishasettinginwhichTecumseh ,#|" shouldnothaveabandonedindividualized,suspicionbased $h# testinginfavorofblanket,suspicionlessones.Forthese %T $ reasons,Tecumsehspolicydoesnot fitwithintheclosely  guardedcategoryofconstitutionallypermissiblesuspicionless  searches,andthisCourtshouldaffirm.  h   A.0  ThePolicyIsUnconstitutionalBecauseThe ` GovernmentDidNotEstablishThat L  Individualized,SuspicionBasedSearchesWere 8  NotFeasibleBeforeImplementingSuspicionLess $ t DrugTestingOfChildrenThatParticipateIn  ` ExtraCurricularActivities. L   U~  InVernoniav.Acton,515U.S.646,665(1995),theCourt   upheldapublicschoolssuspicionlessdrugtestingpolicythat   appliedtochildrenwhowereparticipatinginextracurricular t  athletics.OneofthemostimportantissuesinVernoniawas `  whethertheschooldistrictestablishedthattheindividualized, L  suspicionbasedsearches,whichthisCourtupheldin_T.L.O_, 8 469U.S.325,wereineffectivebeforeresortingtosuspicion $t lesssearches.SeeVernonia,515U.S.at665,678(OConnor, ` J.,dissenting);seealsoU.S.SupremeCourtOfficialTranscript L ofOralArgument,Vernoniav.Acton,1995WL353412,at* 8 14,*1517(1995).BeforeupholdingthesearchesinVernonia, $ theCourtrejectedtheargumentthat,wheretheschooldistrict  facedan immediatecrisisand rebellioncausedby asharp  increaseindruguse,suspicionbasedtestingwouldbe  feasible.SeeVernonia,515U.S.at665.TheCourtconcluded  that testingbasedonsuspicionofdrugusewouldnotbe p better,butworsethansuspicionlessgroupsearchesinthis \ unique,crisissituation._v   3      _ԀSeeid. H Ї  AlthoughtheCourtwarned againsttheassumptionthat  suspicionlessdrugtestingwillreadilypassconstitutional  musterinothercontexts,seeVernonia,515U.S.at665,the  Courtdidnotexplicitlyrulethatasuspicionlesssearchwould t beheldunconstitutionalifthegovernmentdidnotfirstestablish ` thatindividualized,suspicionbasedsearcheswerenotfeasible L  untilChandlerv.Miller,520U.S.305(1997).There,theCourt 8  struckdownastatelawthatrequiredcandidatesforstateoffice $ t topassasuspicionlessurinalysisdrugtest.Thefactsin  ` Chandlerlackedthe immediatecrisis, rebellion,and sharp  L  increaseindrugusethatjustifiedthesuspicionlesssearches  8  inVernonia.Infact,theCourtobservedthattherewasno $  evidencethataStateofficeholderhadadrugproblemorthat   suchdrugproblemshadeveratexistedamongthisgroup.See   id.at319.TheCourtheldthatthesuspicionlesssearchlaw   wasunconstitutionalbecausethegovernment offeredno   reasonwhyordinarylawenforcementmethodswouldnot p sufficetoapprehendsuchaddictedindividuals.Seeid.at320. \ \  Thecoreofthisholdingisthatinnonemergent,noncrisis L situations,thegovernmentcannotoveract.Itmustemploy 8 individualized,suspicionbasedsearchesand,significantly, $ establishthattheyarenotfeasiblebeforerollingoutsuspicion  lessgroupsearches.Thelatterareacategoryof closely  guardedexceptions,andtoholdotherwisewouldflipthe  exceptionandtheruleonitshead.SeeChandler,520U.S.at  308,325.TocomplywithVernoniaandChandler,therefore, p thegovernmentmustestablishthatindividualized,suspicion  basedsearchesarenotfeasiblebeforesuspicionlesssearches  canbeimplemented._^   4      _Ԁ  z  AlthoughChandlerdidnotexplicitlyrequirepublicschools (x tofollowthisrule,theSeventhCircuitCourtofAppealsdid.  d InWillisbyWillisv.AndersonCommunitySch.Corp.,158F.  P 3d415(7thCir.1998),theappealscourtstruckdown  < suspicionlessdrugtestingofchildrenbypublicschool  ( officials.ThecourtobservedthatunderVernonia, courts    considerthefeasibilityofasuspicionbasedsearchwhen   assessingtheefficacyofthegovernment'spolicy.Id.at421.   Notingthat, theimmediacyoftheCorporation'sconcerndoes   notrisetothelevelofthatinVernonia,thecourtstruckdown t  thesuspicionless,blanketsearchesbecausethesuspicionless `  testsaddressedconcernsthatcouldhavebeen tackledby L  meansofatraditional,suspicionbasedapproach.Id.at423 8 24. Particularlybecausethe[school]hasnotdemonstrated $t thatasuspicionbasedsystemwouldbeunsuitable,infact ` wouldnotbehighlysuitable,wethinkthebalanceofour L contextspecificinquirytipsinfavorof[thestudents].Id.at  42425.    ThesameconclusionwasreachedinJoyv.PennHarris < MadisonSch.Corp.,212F.3d1052(7thCir.2000).The (x absenceofimmediacyinJoywasclear: [Theschool]simply  d hasnotestablishedthatanyimmediateproblemwithdrugsor  P alcoholexistsforitsstudentsinextracurricularactivities.Id.  < at1065.CitingChandler,theappealscourtheldthat  (  _suspicionless_Ԁdrugtestingwithoutevidenceofadrugproblem    bythetargetedgroupshouldnotbeusedifsuspicionbased   drugtestingispossible.Id. Withrespecttorandomtestingof   thosewhoparticipateinextracurricularactivities,webelieve   that,accordingtothemethodologyemployedbytheSupreme t  CourtinVernonia,therehasbeenaninadequateshowingthat `  suchanintrusionisjustified._y   5      _ԀId. L    TheholdingsinWillisandJoyrecognizethatdifferent $t searchesareconstitutionalindifferentcontexts,andthe ` adoptionbyschoolsofonlysuspicionlesssearches,without L anybasisfortheexception,areunreasonable.Thisseamlessly 8 weavesChandlerintotheschooldrugtestinglandscape,where, $ asthiscasedemonstrates,itismuchneeded.Liketheschool  districtsinWillisandJoy,Tecumsehdidnotfacethe drug  crisisor rebellionthatdistinguishedVernonia.Likewise,  Tecumsehdidnotestablishthatindividualized,suspicionbased  testingwasnotfeasiblebeforeitrolledoutitssuspicionless, p drugtestingregime._z   6      _ԀThisapproachviolatesChandlerand \ VernoniaasclearlyasthesearchpoliciesatissueinAnderson  andJoy.LikethesuspicionlesstestsinChandler,Anderson,  andJoy,implementationofasuspicionlessPolicyprobably   [was]notneeded,anditssuspicionbasedapproachshould t nothavebeenabandoned.SeeChandler,520U.S.at320._    7      _ `  g~  L    B.0  ThePrivacyInterestsatIssueHereAreGreater  thanThoseThatWereIntrudeduponinVernonia.  1  Todeterminethenatureoftheprivacyinterestsofthe < studentswhoarecompelledtoundergosuspicionless,blanket (x drugtesting,courtsmustanalyzetwofactors:(1)thecontext  d and(2)thestudentsrelationshipwiththegovernment.See  P Vernonia,515U.S.at 657.InVernonia,theplaintiffsatissue  < werestudentathletes,whohavealesserexpectationofprivacy  , thanotherstudentsforseveralreasons.Seeid.First,these    children gooutfortheteamvoluntarily.Theyalsopursue    athleticcompetitionknowingthatthey communallyundress   intheirlockerrooms,whichrequiresalackofprivacy.Mostof   thechildrenmustundergoaurinalysisandphysicalbeforethey x  cantakethefield.Moreover,theyvoluntarilysubmitto d  regulationsonfieldsandinarenasthatdonotapplytoother P  children,whichmakesathleticsmorelikearegulatedindustry. < Seeid.Whilethesefactorsaccountedforthediminished (x privacyexpectationsofstudentathletes,theCourtheldthat d thesefactorswerelimitedtostudentathletes.Theremainderof P thestudentbodydoesnot shed[its]constitutionalrights...at < theschoolhousegate.Tinkerv.DesMoines_Indep_.Community ( Sch.Dist.,393U.S.503,506(1969).Vernonia,therefore,  distinguishedbetweentwogroupsofschoolchildren:the  studentathleteswhohaveadiminishedexpectationofprivacy,  andtheremainingstudentswhohaveahigherexpectationof  privacy. t   Thisdistinctionhasbeencitedbyagrowingmajorityof d courtswhichhaveheldthatthehigherprivacyexpectationsof P nonstudentathletescannotbeintrudeduponbysuspicionless < groupdrugtestsaseasilyasthediminishedprivacyrightsofthe  ( studentathletesinVernonia.Asonedistrictcourtrecently !  ruled, "!   8  studentssubjecttodrugtestinginthe_Lockney_ԀSchool $# Districtcompriseamuchbroadersegmentofthe t% $ studentpopulationthanthegroupofstudentathletesin  Vernonia.Theirexpectationsofprivacyarehigher.  Studentswhodonotparticipateinathleticsarenot  subjecttothesamedailycommunalundressorpublic t showeringasstudentathletes;compulsoryattendanceat ` schoolismuchdifferentthanvoluntaryparticipationin L  extracurricularactivities.TheCourt,applyingthe 8  reasoningoftheSupremeCourtinVernonia,findsthat $ t thestudentbodyintheDistrictholdsahigher  ` expectationofprivacythanstudentathletes. L  үSee_Tannahill_Ԁv._Lockney_,133F.Supp.2d919,929(N.D.Tex.   2001).     The SupremeCourtpointedoutthatthestudentpopulation (x  asawholeenjoysahigherexpectationofprivacythanthe d  studentathletessubjecttotesting._Tannahill_,133F.Supp.2d P at928,citingVernonia,515U.S.at657.Thus,asthenumber < ofstudentswhoarecompelledtotakedrugtestsgrowslarger ( andincludesincreasingnumbersof_nona__thletes_,their  expectationofprivacygrowstoo.See,e.g.,Anderson,158F.  3d415,421(7thCir.1998);Joy,212F.3d1052,1063(7thCir.  2000);Brooksv.EastChambersSch.Dist.,730F.Supp.759,  766(S.D.Tex.1989),_affd_.withoutop.,(5thCir.1991) t (holdingthat thelawoftheSeventhCircuitisdifferentfrom ` andlessprotectiveofstudentrightsthanFifthCircuitlaw); L Theodorev.DelawareValleySch.Dist.,761A.2d652,660, 8 148Ed.LawRep.985(_Cmwlth_.Ct.2000)( studentswho $t participateinextracurricularactivitiesdonothavea ` diminishedexpectationofprivacy);TrinidadSch.Dist.No.1 L v.Lopez,963P.2d1095,1107(Co.1998)( Vernoniaislimited 8 toathletes,notallstudentswhoparticipateinextracurricular  $ activities). !  շ  Inspiteoftheserulings,theTenthCircuitCourtofAppeals `#" heldthatchildrenwhoparticipatein_nona__thletic_,extra L$# curricularactivitiespersehavediminishedprivacyrights.See 8% $ Earls,242F.3d1264,1276(10thCir.2001).Thisholding  overlookstheCourtsdistinctionbetweenthediminished  privacyexpectationsofstudentathletesandthehigher  expectationsof_nona__thletes_.SeeVernonia,515U.S.at65758. t Anditcannotbesquaredwiththereasonsthatgaverisetothe ` Courtsdistinction.OftheCourtsreasonsforfindingstudent L  athleteshavediminishedprivacyexpectations,theTenthCircuit 8  heldthatnonstudentathleteswhoparticipateinextracurricular $ t activitieshavethesameprivacyexpectationsastheathletes  ` becausebothgroupsofchildrenvoluntarilyenterthese  L  activitiesandalsohavetofollowrules.SeeEarls,242F.3dat  8  1276. $  Z  Thesetworeasonsalonearenotpersuasive.Qualitatively, t  thisCourtsholdinginVernoniaregardingthediminished `  privacyexpectationsofstudentathletesmakessensebecause L  thedrugtestsrequirestudentathletestoperformonlythose 8 taskswhichtheathletesalreadyperformvoluntarily: $t undergoingaurinalysis,whichisrequiredofathletesbefore ` theycanplay,andenteringabathroom,undressingandusing L thefacilities,whichathletesdoeverydaybeforetheytakethe 8 field.SeeVernonia,515U.S.at617.Bycontrast,students $ whoparticipatein_nona__thletic_Ԁextracurricularactivitiesdonot  submittopreseasonphysicals,urinalysesor communal  undressinlockerrooms.Seeid.Forcingstudent_nona__thletes_  toundergourinalysescoercesthemintoalossofprivacythat  theydidnotvoluntarilyforfeitasthestudentathletesdid.By p obfuscatingthisdistinction,particularlywhereVernoniadrew \ suchaclearline,theTenthCircuitCourtofAppeals H underminesthisCourtsholdingthatstudentdonot shedtheir 4 constitutionalrights...attheschoolhousegate.SeeTinkerv.  p DesMoines_Indep_.CommunitySch.Dist.,393U.S.503,506  !\ (1969). !H     #"     C.0  TheNatureOfTheIntrusionIsUnreasonable  BecauseItsConsequencesDepriveStudentsOf  TheOpportunityToLearn,EarnAcademic  Credits,AndEnrollInClasses. t   AnotherfundamentaldifferencebetweenVernoniaandthis  d caseisthenatureoftheintrusioncreatedbydrugtesting.In  P Vernonia,theCourtdefinedthenatureoftheintrusionbythe  < consequencesofthesearch:theresultsofthedrugtestsarenot  ( usedforanyinternaldisciplinaryfunction.SeeVernonia,515    U.S.at658. [_T]he_Ԁsearchhereisundertakenforprophylactic   anddistinctly_nonpunitive_Ԁpurposes.Id.at658&n.2.Inlight   ofthese purposesandconsequences,theCourtruledthatthe   natureoftheintrusionwas notsignificantorunreasonable. t  Id.at659. `    AlthoughthisCourtstoppedshortofidentifyingthe P consequencesthatwouldbesufficientlyintrusivetorendera < suspicionless,groupdrugtestingpolicyunconstitutional,one ( statesupremecourtstruckdownapolicythatdeprivedastudent  oftheopportunitytolearn,earnacademiccredits,andenrollin  classes.InTrinidad,963P.2dat1098,astudentwhoenrolled  inamusicclassforacademiccreditwasrequiredtoparticipate  intheextracurricularmarchingbandinordertoremaininthis t class.Seeid.at1097&n.2.Onechildrefusedtotakethedrug ` testsand,underthepolicy,hewasnotallowedtoparticipatein L theband.Consequently,hecouldnotremainenrolledinthe 8 musicclass.Seeid.(testimonyofLopezandthebanddirector). $t Underscoringtheseharshconsequences,theColoradoSupreme ` Courtstruckdownthepolicyasunconstitutional,notingthat L  Inourview,thetypeofvoluntarinesstowhichtheVernonia 8 Courtreferreddoesnotapplytostudentswhowanttoenrollin  $ aforcreditclassthatispartoftheschoolscurriculum.Id.at !  1107. "!   ThisconclusionisconsistentwithVernoniaandshouldbe L$# reachedhere.LikethepolicyinTrinidad,Tecumsehspolicy 8% $ deprivesstudentsoftheopportunitytolearn,earnacademic  credits,andenrollinclassesiftheyrefusetosubmittodrug  testing.ThedistrictcourtinEarlsfoundthat somefaculty  membersgiveextracredittostudentswhoparticipateincertain t activities.SeeEarlsv.Bd.ofEduc.ofTecumsehPublicSch. ` Dist.,115F.Supp.2d1281,1292(W.D.Okla.2000).One L  teacheradmittedthat participatinginlivestockcompetitions 8  canonlyhelpthegrade,nothurtitthroughextracredit $ t points.Seeid.at1292&n.45.Thedistrictcourtalsofound  ` that:  L  8  studentsenrolledin[thisteachers]agricultureclasses   canearnextracredit,andthusimprovetheirgrades,by   competinginlivestockshows.[Thisteacher]further t  testifiedthatteachers stronglyencourageall `  agriculturestudentstobemembersoftheFFA[Future L  FarmersofAmerica],andtocompeteintheFFAshows 8 sothattheycanapplywhattheyhavelearnedinthe $t agricultureclass.` {Id.,at1292&n.44(internalcitationsomitted).    TecumsehsPolicyalsosubmitsstudentsenrolledin P academicclasseslinkedtostudentactivitiestodrugtesting,as < wasthecaseinTrinidad.Forexample,choirclassisacourse (x offeredaspartoftheschoolsregularcurriculum.SeeEarls, d 115F.Supp.2dat129193.Astudentcanenrollinchoir, P however,onlyifshesatisfiestheschoolsrequirementthatshe < participateinextracurricularchoiractivitiesprovidedbythe ( school.Seeid.Ifthestudentdoesnotparticipateinextra  curricularchoir,shecannotenrollintheacademicchoirclass.  Seeid.Theconsequencesofrefusingtosubmittodrugtesting,   therefore,affectmorethanvoluntarily,_nona__cademic_Ԁactivities: !  iteffectivelyviolatestheschoolsprerequisiteforenrollingin t"! theacademicclass,whichprohibitsthestudentfromenrolling `#" intheacademicclass.Seeid. L$#   8% $ +  Althoughthesefindingssmackofanunreasonable   intrusion,theywerenotmeaningfultothedistrictcourtin  Earls.Relyingontheschoolprincipalsverbalassuranceand  aprovisioninthePolicyprovidingthatno academicsanctions t willbeimposedforviolationsofthispolicy,thecourtruled ` thatTecumsehsapproachhasbeento allowstudentsrefusing L  toconsenttodrugtestingtoremaininthecorrespondingclass. 8  SeeEarls,115F.Supp.2dat1292.Thecourtalsoruled, there $ t isnoevidencethatstudentswhorefusetoconsenttodrug  ` testingaretreatedanydifferentlywithregardtoextracredit  L  thananyothernoncompetitors,orthatanystudentsgrades  8  havebeenloweredbecauseoftheirrefusaltoconsenttodrug $  testing.Id.Theappealscourtdidnotaddressthisissue.{   8         .  TheseconclusionsoverlookthecruxofVernoniasholding `  regardingthenatureoftheintrusion:iftheonlyconsequenceof L  arefusaltotakeatestisthelostopportunitytoparticipateina 8 voluntaryathleticactivity,thentheintrusioncreatedbythedrug $t testis notsignificant.SeeVernonia,515U.S.at659. ` However,ifarefusaltotakeadrugtestdepriveschildrenofa L learningopportunityorachancetoimprovehisorhergrades, 8 thenthisconsequenceis significantandthepolicyistoo $ intrusiveunderVernonia.SeeTrinidad,963P.2dat1098.  Thisruleshouldapplyherewithequalforce:itisundisputed  thatifstudentsrefusetosubmittodrugtests,thentheycannot  participateintheFutureFarmersofAmerica(FFA).SeeEarls,  115F.Supp.2dat129193.Thisdeprivesstudentsofthe p opportunitytoacquireskillsandlearnlessonsfromFFAthat \ aredirectlyrelatedtothecurriculuminagricultureclass.Thus, H thedistrictcourtsemphasisthatstudentscanremainenrolled 4 inagricultureclassafterbeingremovedfromFFAoverlooks  p thelostopportunitytolearnfromFFA.  k  Equallymisguidedisthedistrictcourtsconclusion P regardingextracredit.TheTecumsehteachertestifiedthat < eventhoughastudentwhocannotparticipateinFFAcannot (x havehisorhergrade lowered,thestudentinfactlosesthe  d opportunitytoraisehisgrade.Seeid.at1292&n.4445.The  P consequenceisthatstudentswhorefusetosubmittotesting  < loseanopportunitytoimproveagrademerelyforrefusingto  ( takethedrugtest.Losingthisopportunitycouldresultina    loweroverallgradeaverageforastudent.Theseconsequences,   farfrommerelylosingtheopportunitytoplayfootballor   baseball,are significant.SeeVernonia,515U.S.at659.   Thesearepreciselythetypeofintrusionsthatconcernedthe t  CourtinVernonia,andthattheColoradoSupremeCourtsought `  toprohibitinTrinidad,andthattheCourtshouldnowholdare L  unreasonable. 8  x    D.0  TheTenthCircuitCorrectlyHeldThatThe ( SchoolDistrictsConcernIsNotImmediate  BecauseThereIsNoIllegal DrugCrisis,   RebellionOrDramaticallyIncreasedDrug  ProblemInTecumsehsSchools.  $  InthebalancinganalysissetforthinVernonia,courtsmust (x assesstheimmediacyofthegovernmentalconcern.In d Vernonia,theimmediacywasclear: [_T]eachers_Ԁand P administratorsobservedasharpincreaseindruguse.Students < begantospeakoutabouttheirattractiontothedrugculture,and ( toboastthattherewasnothingtheschoolcoulddoaboutit.  Vernonia,515U.S.at648. Theadministrationwasatitswits  endand8[_t]he_Ԁcoincidenceofanalmostthreefoldincreasein   classroomdisruptionsanddisciplinaryreportsalongwiththe !  staff'sdirectobservationsofstudentsusingdrugsor t"! glamorizingdrugandalcoholuseledtheadministrationtothe `#" inescapableconclusionthattherebellionwasbeingfueledby L$# alcoholanddrugabuse8.Id.at649.TheCourtheldthat 8% $ thisfindingofneedandimmediacywasthe mostsignificant  elementinacasewherethe governmentsresponsibilities,  underapublicschoolsystem,asguardianandtutorofchildren  entrustedtoitscareareimplicated.SeeVernonia,515U.S.at t 665. ` a  SuchimmediacydoesnotexistinEarls.AstheTenth  P Circuitobserved:  <  8  theevidenceofdruguseamongthosesubjecttothe    Policyisfarfromtheepidemicandimmediatecrisis x   facedbytheVernoniaschoolsandemphasizedbythe d  SupremeCourtsopinion.Thedistrictcourtinthiscase P  admittedasmuch:[_a]dmittedly_Ԁtheevidenceinthis <  casedoesnotshowanepidemicofillegaldrugusein (x  theTecumsehSchoolDistrict.[citationomitted] d  Rather,theevidenceofactualdrugusage,particularly P amongthetestedstudents,isminimal.< Seeid.at1272.Notingtheabsenceofsomeelementof  immediacytothegovernmentsconcern,theTenthCircuit  stuckdownthePolicybecauseof thepaucityofevidenceofan  actualdrugabuseproblemamongthosesubjecttothePolicy.  SeeId.at127778(emphasisadded). t Ӏ  ThisholdingisconsistentnotonlywiththisCourts d decisioninVernonia,butalsowiththemajorityoffederaland P statecourtdecisionsthatappliedtheimmediacyofthe < governmentalconcernprongofVernoniassuspicionless ( searchanalysis.InJoy,212F.3dat1065,theappealscourt  ruledthatunderVernoniaanalysis,aspectsofthesuspicionless  searcheswereunconstitutionalbecausetheschool simplyhas   notestablishedthatanyimmediateproblemwithdrugsor !  alcoholexistsforitsstudentsinextracurricularactivities.|   9      ׀See t"! id. `#"   InBrooksv.EastChambersSch.Dist.,theFifthCircuit  CourtofAppealsaffirmedadecisiontostrikedowna  suspicionlessdrugtestingpolicy.Theappealscourtheldthat,   Infact,schoolauthoritiescouldnotciteasingledrugrelated t injuryinsevenyears,inthecourseofeitherschoolorafter ` schoolactivities.Brooks,730F.Supp.at764.Therewas no L  evidenceofimmediacy,andthepolicywasstruckdown.Id. 8  at761. $ t   In_Tannahill_Ԁv.exrel._Tannahill_Ԁv._Lockney_Ԁ_Indep_.Sch.    Dist.,133F.Supp.2d919(N.D.Tex.2001),thedistrictcourt   struckdownasuspicionlessdrugtestingpolicywhere there   existedverylittleevidencethatdrugoralcoholabuseby[the   district's]studentsconstitutedamajorproblemintheoperation t  oftheschools.Id.at924.Withoutanyevidenceof `  immediacy,thecourtheldthattheschooldistrictwasdoingthat L  whichwasconstitutionallyimpermissible: respondingwithits 8 [policy]toaperceivedpublicdemandthattheschoolsdo $t somethingaboutthegeneralsocietalproblem.Id. `   ThefactsinthesecasessharplycontrastthoseinVernonia,  andelsewhere,inwhichpublicschooladministratorsand  teacherswereconfrontedwithgenuineemergencies.Whenthe  schoolofficialsrespondedtothesegenuineemergencies,by t implementingsuspicionlesssearches,theyweresustained. ` Findingsofimmediacyinpublicschoolshaveincluded L incidentsofviolenceinvolvingguns,knives,otherweapons,or 8 someviolentthreattothechildren.See,e.g.,Thompsonv. $t CarthageSch.Dist.,87F.3d979(8thCir.1996)(sustaining ` searchesbecauseoftheabundanceofevidencethattheschool L hadaserious,documentedweaponsproblemthatthreatenedthe 8 livesofthestudents);InreF.B.,726A.2d361(Pa.1999)  $ (acknowledgingthatalthougha patdownintrudesona !  studentslegitimateexpectationofprivacy,  theimmediate "! threatthatweaponswerepresentinschooljustifiedthesearches #" undertheVernonia);InInterestofS.S.,452Pa.Super.15,680 $# A.2d1172(Pa.Super.1996)(sustainingstudentsearchesdue p% $ tothehighrateofweaponsrelatedviolenceinPhiladelphias  publicschools).   K   Vernoniahasnotbeenappliedreflexively,however,to < upholdsuspicionless,masssearcheswheneveraschoolofficial (x suspectsthataweaponmightbepresent.Onthecontrary,in  d theweaponscontexttheVernoniaanalysishasprovensensitive  P enoughtodistinguishbetweenperceivedimmediacyand  < genuine findingsofneedthatconcernweapons.InThomas  ( v.Roberts,261F.3d1160,1169(11thCir.2001),asuspicion    lessstripsearchofschoolchildrenwasstruckdownunder   Vernonia.TheEleventhCircuitCourtofAppealsheld, [_n]or_   isthisacasewhere8schoolofficials_receive[d_]information   thatanunidentifiedstudent[was]carryingaweaponorother t  dangerousarticleonschoolproperty,thereforerequiringa `  generalizedsearchtoavoidanimmediatethreatofphysical L  harmtostudents,faculty,orstaff.Seeid.Recognizingthat 8 someimmediacywasnecessarytojustifyasuspicionless $t searchofchildreninthepublicschoolsetting,thecourtheld ` thatthesearcheswereunconstitutionalunderVernonia. L S  ThiswastheapproachwasadoptedbytheTenthCircuitin  Earlsv.Tecumseh:8    8  theevidenceofdruguseamongthosesubjecttothe (x Policyisfarfromthe epidemicand immediate d crisisfacedbytheVernoniaschoolsandemphasized P bytheSupremeCourt'sopinion.Thedistrictcourtin < thiscaseadmittedasmuch: [_a]dmittedly_Ԁtheevidence ( inthiscasedoesnotshowanepidemicofillegaldrug  useintheTecumsehSchoolDistrict. |SeeEarls,at127273.Tecumsehsofficialswerenotfaced P!  withaknifeslashedbusseatinthemidstofaserious, <"! documentedweaponsproblem,aswasthecaseinThompson, (#x" 87F.3d979.Norweretheofficialsfacinganalarmingrateof $d# weaponsrelatedviolenceintheirpublicschools,aswasthe %P $ casein_In_ԀInterestofS.S.,452Pa.Super.15.Mostimportantly,  theimmediacythatwaspresentinVernoniadoesnotexisthere.  Insum,thelackofanyimmediacyor findingofneedonthis  recordclearlydistinguishesthiscasefromVernonia.}   10      ׀Inthese t nonemergentcircumstances,Tecumsehshouldnothave ` abandoneditsindividualized,suspicionbasedsearchesinfavor L  ofmass,suspicionlesssearches.  8    II.0  ANINFLATEDFEAROFSCHOOLVIOLENCE  ( DOESNOTJUSTIFYMASS,SUSPICIONLESS    SEARCHESFORNONVIOLENTBEHAVIOR   -   Despiteofficialcrimestatisticsthatshowyouthcrimerates P  fallingsignificantly,_X   11      _Ԁfearofoutofcontrolchildrenhas <  increaseddramaticallyoverthepastseveralyearsanddriventhe  misperceptionthatschoolviolenceisontheriseandassociated  withdruguse.Thewidespreadreportingofrarebutdramatic  occurrencesofschoolshootingsperpetuatefrighteningand t cynicalstereotypesaboutadolescents.Suchreportshave ` causedalarmedparentsandothercommunitymemberstothink L  violenceintheschoolsismorecommonthanitis.See_Tamar_ 8  _Lewin_,DespiteRecentCarnage,SchoolViolenceIsNotonthe $ t Rise,Dec.3,1997,N.Y.Times,atA.16;seealsoVincent  ` _Schiraldi_Ԁ&Jason_Ziedenberg_,HowDistortedCoverageof  L  JuvenileCrimeAffectsPublicPolicy,inZeroTolerance:  8  ResistingtheDriveforPunishmentinOurSchools(William $  _Ayers_Ԁetal.,_eds_.,2001)[hereinafterZeroTolerance](media   coverageofjuvenilecrimeisbadlyskewedtowardviolent,   idiosyncraticacts,andpresentedoutofcontext).     Unfortunatelyfearofschoolviolenceisfargreaterthan 8 violenceitself.Althoughtheoverallriskofviolenceandinjury $t atschoolhasremainedlowandhasnotchangedsubstantially ` overthepasttwentyyears,parentsreportbeingincreasingly L apprehensiveabouttheirschools.ArecentGalluppollfound 8 thatnearlyhalfoftheparentssurveysfearedfortheirchildrens $ safetywhentheysentthemofftoschool,whereasonly24  percentofparentsreportedthisconcernin1977.Gallup  Organization,ParentsofChildreninK12(August2426,  1999).InMay1999,shortlyaftertheshootingsatColumbine  HighSchoolinLittleton,Colorado,74percentofparentssaid  thataschoolshootingwasverylikelytohappenintheir  community,GallupOrganization,1025Adults(May79,1999), t eventhoughastudenthasagreaterchanceofbeingkilledby ` lighteningthanbyschoolviolence. L  $  Inresponse,schoolofficialsareincreasinglytakingonthe  < issuesofschoolsecurityinaheavyhandedmanner.Random  ( drugtestingofhighschoolstudentshasproliferated   12      ׀since    1995whenthisCourtupheldVernoniasrandomdrugtesting   policytargetinginterscholasticathletics.Suchpolicies,once   consideredthelastresortoffrustratedschoolofficialsto   addressseriousdrugcrisesinschool,515U.S.at649,havenow t  becomepopularas necessarymeasures.SeeBriefofAmici `  CuriaeinSupportofPetitioners,NationalSchoolBoardAssoc. L  etal.,at4(supportingdrugtestingbecause [_o]ne_Ԁofthemost 8 troublingproblemswithwhichpublicschoolshavehadto $t contendinrecentyearshasbeen...thenumberofviolentacts ` committedatschool);seealsoBriefofAmiciCuriaein L SupportofPetitioners,WashingtonLegalFoundationetal.,at 8 4( druguseisstronglycorrelatedto...violentconduct). $ Whiletheuseofsuchstrategiesseemstemptinglyeffectivein  combatingdruguseamongteens,thefoundationformass,  suspicionlesssearchesnamelyconcernforschoolsafetyis  beliedbyresearchshowingthatschoolsaresafeandthat  violenceremainsanaberrationofyouthfulbehavior.More p importantly,thereisscantevidencenationallylinkingdruguse \ withschoolviolence,andnonewhatsoeverinTecumseh.A H schooldistrictsdesiretofosterdrugabstinenceinan 4 environmentwherethereisneitherahistoryofdrugusenor  p violent/criminalactivitymustnotbepermittedtomake  suspicionlesssearchingbecomethenormratherthanthe  exception.   5.    A.0  ThePerceptionThatSchoolsAreIncreasingly (x ViolentandThatOurChildrenandTeachersAre  d NotSafeIsatOddsWithEvidenceShowingThat  P SchoolsAreAmongtheSafestPlacestoBe. <  ^./  Americasschoolsareamongthesafestplacestobeona    daytodaybasis.RichardW.Riley&JanetReno, x   IntroductoryLettertoU.S._Dept_.OfEduc.&U.S._Dept_.Of d  Justice,EarlyWarning,TimelyResponse:AGuidetoSafe P  Schools,Introduction(1998).Byvirtuallyeverymeasure, <  schoolcrimesaredeclining.Schooldeaths,themostarresting (x  measure,areverylow. [_T]rends_Ԁthroughoutthe1990sshow d  thatthenumberofschoolhomicideshasbeendeclining.U.S. P _Dept_ԀofHealthandHumanServices,YouthViolence:AReport < oftheSurgeonGeneral,31(2001).Twonationwidestudiesof ( schoolhomicidesconductedbytheCentersforDiseaseControl  andPreventionincollaborationwiththeU.S.Departmentsof  EducationandJusticeconcludedthatbetween1992and1999  schoolassociatedhomicideswerelessthan1percentofall  homicidesamongschoolagechildren.Id.(emphasisadded); t seealsoTheNationalSchoolSafetyCenter,SchoolAssociated ` ViolentDeaths(Aug.1999). L   Lessseriouscrimeinschoolshasalsodecreased.Between $t 1993and1999,studentreportsofphysicalfightsonandoff ` schoolgroundsdeclined,asdidthenumberofstudentsreported L ashavingbroughtaguntoschool.NancyD._Brener_Ԁetal., 8 RecentTrendsinViolenceRelatedBehaviorsAmongHigh  $ SchoolStudents,282JournaloftheAmericanMedical !  Association440446(1999).Duringthissameperiod,nonfatal "! schoolcrimesingeneralhavedecreased:totalnumberof #" reportedschoolcrimesdecreased29percent;seriousviolent $# crimesdecreased34percent;violentcrimesdecreased27 p% $ percent;andtheftsdecreased29percent.P.Kauffmanetal.,  U.S.Depts.OfEducationandJustice,IndicatorsofSchool  ChoiceandSafety(1998&2000).  :  Becauserareschoolshootingsbroadcastbythemediaareso (x horrific,schoolboardsareoverreacting._   13      _ԀTheconclusionsof  d separatesurveysofschooladministratorsandhighschool  P studentsgroupsatthegroundlevelsuggestaverydifferent  < schoolenvironmentthantheunsafeoneperceivedbyparents.  ( InViolenceandDisciplineProblemsinU.S.PublicSchools,    19961997,theNationalCenterforEducationStatistics   (_NCES_)surveyedanationallyrepresentativesampleof1,234   schoolprincipalsanddisciplinariansattheelementary,middle   andhighschoollevels.S.Heavisideetal.,U.S._Dept_.of t  Education,_Natl_ԀCtr.forEduc.Statistics,Violenceand `  DisciplineProblemsinU.S.PublicSchools,19961997(1998, L  _NCES_Ԁ98030).Whentheseprincipalswereaskedtolistwhat 8 theyconsideredseriousormoderateproblemsintheirschools, $t themostfrequentlycitedproblemsatalllevelsweretheless ` violentbehaviorssuchastardiness(40%),absenteeism(25%), L andphysicalconflictsbetweenstudents(21%).Thecritical 8 incidentsthataretypicallythefocusofschoolsafetydebates $ werereportedtobeatleast amoderateproblemonly  relativelyinfrequently:druguse(9%),gangs(5%),possession  ofweapons(2%),andphysicalabuseofteachers(2%).The   _NCES_Ԁreportfoundthatviolentcrimeoccurredatanannualrate  ofonly53per100,000students._   14      _Ԁ     Opinionsurveysofhighschoolstudentsalsosupportthe  factthatschoolsaresafe.Ironically, [_t]oday_shighschool t seniorsarenomorelikelythantheirparentsweretobe ` assaulted,injured,threatenedorrobbedinhighschool, L  accordingtoresearchersfromtheJusticePolicyInstitute.See 8  Vincent_Schiraldi_Ԁetal.,JusticePolicyInstitute,Schoolsand $ t Suspensions:SelfReportedCrimeandtheGrowingUseof  ` Suspensions(2001)<4; ]O  5  http://www.cjcj.org/sss6E]OERi  7y,F>. Eachyearsince  L  1975,researchersfromtheUniversityofMichigansInstitute  8  forSocialResearchhaveconductedtheMonitoringtheFuture $  surveyfortheUnitedStatesJusticeDepartment._    15      _ԀThesurvey   asksapproximately3,000highschoolseniorsannuallyaseries   ofquestionsaboutthetypesofvictimization,ifany,theyhave   experiencedoverthepast12months,inornearschoolorona   schoolbus.From1976to1998,between94%and95%of p studentsreportedthattheyhadnotbeeninjuredorthreatened \ withinjurywithaweaponatornearschool.TheClassof1998 H wasonlyslightlymorelikelytoreportbeinginjuredor 4 threatenedwithinjury,ortohaveexperiencedpropertydamage  p ortheftthantheClassof1976.SeeU.S._Dept_.ofHealth&  HumanServices,YouthViolence:AReportoftheSurgeon  General,31(2001).   K  Bywayofcomparison,theoutofschoolrateofdeathfor (x childrenisapproximatelyfortytimesgreater.Melissa  d _Sickmund_Ԁetal.,U.S._Dept_.ofJustice,JuvenileOffensesand  P Victims:1997UpdateonViolence,StatisticsSummary(1997).  < Putanotherway,99percentoftheviolentdeathsofchildren  ( occurredoutsideofschoolgroundsbetween1992and1994.Id.    Finally,90percentofallchildhooddeathstakeplaceinornear   home,notinschool,andtheytakeplaceafterschool.Elizabeth   _Donohue_Ԁetal.,JusticePolicyInst.,SchoolHouseHype:The   SchoolShootings,andtheRealRisksKidsFaceinAmerica t  (1999)<4f]O  5  http://www.cjcj.org/sss6O]OORi  7P>. `   P    B.0  IfPermitted,GeneralizedDrugTestingofEvery P PublicSchoolStudentWillBecomeAsRoutine& < InflexibleasOther ZeroToleranceMeasures ( ThatPunishChildrenByDeprivingThemof  SchoolInvolvement. PPR  _Misperceptions_Ԁaboutsafetyinourschoolshaveledschools P toenact zerotolerancerulesthatpunishthemisbehaviorof < childrenbydeprivingthemofschoolinvolvement.   16       (x Tecumsehsdrugtestingpolicyisatypicalexamplethat,if  upheld,willadvancetootherschooldistrictsasrapidlyasother  symbolic gettoughmeasures.  T  SincepassageoftheGunFreeSchoolsAct,supra,some (x formofzerotolerancepolicyhasbecomethenorminpublic  d schools.    17      ׀Localschoolboardshavebroadenedzerotolerance  P policiesbeyondthefederalmandatesofweapons,toinclude  < moretypesofbehavior(e.g.drugs,alcohol,threatsor  ( swearing).Absurdconsequencesofthisone-size-fits-all    mentalityhavebeenreportedinthepastseveralyears.InWest   Virginia,aseventhgraderwhosharedazinccoughdropwith   aclassmatewassuspendedforthreedayspursuanttothe   school'santi-drugpolicybecausethecoughdropwasnot t  clearedwiththeoffice.InNorthCarolina,asixyear-oldkissed `  hisclassmate(heclaimedsheaskedhimtodoso);hewas L  suspendedforonedayforviolatingtheschool'srulewhich 8 precluded"unwarrantedandunwelcometouching."In $t Louisiana,asecond-graderbroughthisgrandfather'swatchto  schoolforshowandtell.Thewatchhadaone-inch-long  pocketknifeattached;pursuanttotheschool'sweaponspolicy,  thechildwassuspendedandsenttoanalternativeschoolfora t month.Russell_Skiba_Ԁ&_Reece_ԀPeterson,TheDarkSideofZero ` Tolerance:CanPunishmentLeadtoSafeSchools?80PhiDelta L  _Kappan_Ԁ372(1999).Theubiquityofthesetrivialincidents 8  acrosstimeandlocationsuggeststhattheoverextensionof $ t schoolsanctionstominormisbehaviorisnotanomalous.  ` \  Itisnotthegoalsofzerotolerance,butthemethodsofits   implementationthatdeservescrutiny;methodsthat   unreasonablyabandonindividual,suspicionbasedsearches.   Seegenerally,PartI,supra.Forexample,asabarrierto t  participatinginextracurricularactivities,Tecumsehsdrug `  testingprogramdoesmoreharmthangoodbecauseitdeprives L  studentsofinvolvementinschoolandschoolrelatedactivities. 8 SeealsoPartIC.,supra(TecumsehPolicyunreasonablefor $t deprivingstudentsopportunitytolearnandearnacademic ` credits).Theclassiczerotolerancestrategyofpunishingminor L oreventrivialeventsseverely,ordramaticallyextendingthe 8 lengthofschoolsuspensionorexpulsion,hasledtoasevere $ andproblematicresult:manychildrenaremissingoutonthe  educationtheirschoolsareproviding._   18      _ԀIftheTecumsehschool  boardwantstoprotectyouthandpromotefurtherreductionsin  youthcrime,itshouldkeepschoolsopenlate,fillthemwith  excitingprogramsandactivities,addhealthyfoodandacademic p support,andhelptheirworkingparents.Althoughyouthcrime  wasdownby50percentoverthepastfouryears,mostyouth  crimeoccursafterschoolandoutsideschool,inthehoursfrom  3to6p.m.William_Ayers_Ԁetal.,Introduction,atxiiiinZero t Tolerance.  ` d  Implementingmass,suspicionlessdrugtestingisalso  P questionableanddeservingofscrutinyoutofconcernthatthe  < schooldistrictsrecordkeepingaboutdruguse,anillicit  ( activity,makesstudentssusceptibletoprosecutioninthe    juvenileandcriminaljusticesystems.Schoolsshouldnotbe   encouragedtobecomeadditionalsourcesofreferralstothese   systems.Admittedly,Tecumsehsdrugtestingpolicydoesnot   requireprosecutorialreferralofstudentswhotestpositivefor t  druguse,butlawenforcementnotificationisconceivable,and `  likely,consideringtheGunFreeSchoolsAct,20U.S.C.8921, L  alreadyrequirespolicedepartmentnotificationforanyinstance 8 ofweaponspossessioninschools.󀀀 $t h  Theharshpunishmentsofzerotolerancehavecomeunder  increasingcriticismasarbitrary,unfairandunreasonable.The  legalprofessionjoinedthechorusinFebruary2001,whenthe  AmericanBarAssociationvotedtorecommendendingzero  tolerancepoliciesforschooldiscipline.Thereportsubmitted t withtherecommendationstatedthat zerotolerancehas ` becomeaonesizefitsallsolutiontoalltheproblemsthat L schoolsconfront...[andhas]redefinedallstudentsascriminals 8 withunfortunateconsequences.  $t k  Defendersofzerotolerancepoliciespointtothelarger  threatposedbyseriousviolenceinschools,suggestingthatcivil  rightsviolationsmaybeanunfortunatebutnecessary   compromisetoensurethesafetyofschoolenvironments. !  However,thisargumentismademootbythealmostcomplete t"! lackofdocumentationlinkingzerotolerancewithimproved `#" schoolsafety.Despitemorethantenyearsofimplementation, L$# therehavebeenonlyahandfulofstudiesevaluatingthe 8% $ outcomesofsecuritymeasures.Ofthese,onlyschooluniform  researchappearstohaveenoughsupporttobeconsideredeven  promisingincontributionstoperceptionsofsaferschool  environments.Themostextensivestudiessuggestanegative t relationshipbetweenschoolsecuritymeasuresandschool ` safety.Russell_Skiba_,IndianaEducationalPolicyCenter,Zero L  Tolerance,ZeroEvidence:AnAnalysisofSchoolDisciplinary 8  Practice,at15(Aug.2000).Withanalmostcompletelackof $ t evidencethatzerotolerancemethodswork,lessintrusive  ` alternativesforpreservingschoolsafetymustbeusedbyschool  L  officials. 4   8      @ X CONCLUSION    Zr  FortheforegoingreasonsAmiciCuriae,JuvenileLaw `  Centeretal.,respectfullyrequestthatthejudgementoftheU.S. L  CourtofAppealsfortheTenthCircuitbeaffirmed. 8      4  `    RespectfullySubmitted, L      4  `    MarshaL._Levick_,Esq. $ 0  0040` 440 ` ` 0  CounselofRecord      4  `    LavalS.MillerWilson,Esq.       4  `    BrentA._Cossrow_,Esq.       4  `    JUVENILELAWCENTER       4  `    1315WalnutStreet,Suite400 p      4  `    Philadelphia,PA19107 \      4  `       4  `    CounselforAmiciCuriae 4 Dated:February6,2002  # " #!X XX_Xb&#X8X X!XTRX3'LetterX3' Letter3'LetterX3'LetterT   0,X, X, X0[APPENDIXIdentityofAmici    @  @`  @  @  @h JuvenileLawCenter   :z  JuvenileLawCenter(JLC)isoneoftheoldestlegalservice t firmsforchildrenintheUnitedStates,foundedin1975to ` advancetherightsandwellbeingofchildreninjeopardy.JLC L  paysparticularattentiontotheneedsofchildrenwhocome 8  withinthepurviewofpublicagencies!forexample,abusedor $ t neglectedchildrenplacedinfosterhomes,delinquentyouthsent  ` toresidentialtreatmentfacilitiesoradultprisons,orchildrenin  L  placementwithspecializedservicesneeds.JLCworksto  8  ensurechildrenaretreatedfairlybysystemsthataresupposed $  tohelpthem,andthatchildrenreceivethetreatmentand   servicesthatthesesystemsaresupposedtoprovide.Webelieve   thejuvenilejusticeandchildwelfaresystemsshouldbeused   onlywhennecessary,andworktoensurethatthechildrenand   familiesservedbythosesystemsreceiveadequateeducation, p andphysicalandmentalhealthcare.JLCisanonprofitpublic \ interestfirm.Legalservicesareprovidedatnocosttoour H clients. 4 @66 X AdvocatesforChildrenofNewYork   \   AdvocatesforChildrenofNewYork(AFC)hasworkedfor H over25yearstosecurequalityandequalpubliceducationfor 4 childrenatgreatestriskforschoolbaseddiscriminationand/or   academicfailure.AFCprovidesindividualcaseadvocacy,   technicalassistance,andtrainingforparents,studentsand  professionalsaboutchildrenseducationalneedsandthemeans  ofmeetingthem.AFCengagespublicpolicymakersin  strategiestomodifyproceduresandpracticesthatnegatively l impactonyoungpeoplesacademicsuccess.AFCalso X  conductsindepthanalysesofissuesaffectingacademic D! achievement.Itsexperienceasbothresearcherandadvocatein 0"  thefieldofeducationallowAFCtoprovideinformed #l! commentaryonthepolicyatissuehere.ItsofficesareinNew $X" York,NY. $D #     ChildrenandFamilyJusticeCenter   *  TheChildrenandFamilyJusticeCenterisaholistic  children'slawcenter,aclinicalteachingprogramat t NorthwesternUniversitySchoolofLaw'sLegalClinicanda ` researchandpolicycenterengagedwithamajorurbancourt, L  theJuvenileCourtofCookCounty,initsefforttotransform 8  itselfintoanoutstandingandvitalcommunityresource.The $ t NorthwesternUniversityLegalClinichasrepresentedchildren  ` injuvenileandcriminalproceedingssinceitsfoundingin1969.  L  Today,sevenclinicalstaffattorneysprovidelegal  8  representationforpoorchildren,youth,andparentsinawide $  varietyofmatters,includingjuveniledelinquency,juvenile   transfer,criminal,domesticviolence,abuseandneglect,   adoption,custody,specialeducation,schoolsuspensionand   expulsion,immigrationandpoliticalasylum,andappeals.The   staffattorneyssupervisesecondandthirdyearlawstudentsin p therepresentationandteamwiththeCenter'ssocialworkerand \ thesocialworkstudentswhomshesupervises. H   EducationLawCenterNJ   p ي  #!X XXX8x#YXbX X!XTheEducationLawCenter(_ELC_ԄNJ)isanotforprofitlaw  \ firminNewJerseyspecializingineducationlaw.Sinceits H foundingin1973,_ELC_ԄNJhasactedonbehalfofdisadvantaged 4 studentsandstudentswithdisabilitiestoachieveeducation   reform,schoolimprovementandprotectionofindividualrights.   _ELC_ԄNJseekstoaccomplishthesegoalsthroughresearch,  publiceducation,technicalassistance,advocacyandlegal  representation.Inadditiontoservingasleadcounselto300,000  urbanschoolchildrenwhoaretheplaintiffsinNewJersey#!X XXYXbV#YXbX X!X#!X XXYXb#YXbX X!Xs l schoolfundingcase,#!X XXYXb#YXbX X!XAbbottv.Burke#!X XXYXbo#YXbX X!X,_ELC_ԄNJprovidesafull X  rangeofdirectlegalservicestoparentsinvolvedindisputes D! withpublicschoolofficials._ELC_ԄNJservesapproximately600 0"  individualclientseachyear,primarilyintheareaofspecial #l! educationlaw.#!X XXYXbϏ#YXbX X!X $X"  #!X XXYXb#X8X X!X@ XEducationLawCenterPA $D #  #!X XXX8ߑ#YXbX X!X  _ELC_ԄPAisaprivate,nonprofitpublicinterestlawfirmand  advocacyorganizationdedicatedtohelpingPennsylvanias  childrenobtainaqualityeducation._ELC_ԄPAfocusesonthe  needsofchildrenwhoarepoor,ofcolor,_diabled_,orotherwise t disadvantaged.Formorethantwentyyears,_ELC_ԄPAhas ` workedtowardsimprovingthequalityofpubliceducationfor L  studentsinPennsylvaniathroughtheprovisionofadvice, 8  training,publicationsandtechnicalassistancetoattorneysand $ t advocates,aswellthroughcocounselingandrepresentationof  ` clientsinthecourtsandbeforeadministrativeandlegislative  L  bodies._ELC_ԄPAhasparticipatedasamicuscuriaeinthe  8  PennsylvaniaSupreme&SuperiorCourts,aswellasthisCourt. $  #!X XXYXbc#X8X X!X   JuvenileJusticeProjectofLouisiana        Foundedin1997,theJuvenileJusticeProjectof   Louisiana(_JJPL_)hasestablisheditselfasapartnerinefforts   toreformLouisianasjuvenilejusticesystem.Wehave p dedicatedourselvestoadvocatingnotonlyformoreeffective \ lessexpensivealternativestoincarceration,butalsoforthe H zealousandeffectiverepresentationofchildreninthe 4 juvenilejusticesystem.Webelievethatchildreninthe  p adjudicationstageofproceedingsshouldbeaffordedallthe  \ FourthAmendmentrightsaffordedadults.Particularlyin H thesetimeswhentherearecollateralconsequencestomany 4 juvenileadjudications,ajuvenilesrighttoprivacyshouldbe   protected.Itshouldnotbeerodedpurelyonthegroundsof   theinaccurateperceptionthatschoolsareadangerousplace.  _JJPL_Ԁiscommittedtochallengingallapplicationsoflawthat  erodestudentsrighttoprivacyinschools.Inorderfor  childrentogrowandthrive,schoolsmustrespectandprotect l theindividualrightsoftheirstudentsjustasjealouslyas X  thosesamerightsaresafeguardedforadults.  D! @ X JusticePolicyInstitute   #!X XXX8#YXbX X!X  Formedin1997,theJusticePolicyInstitute(_JPI_)isa  policydevelopmentandresearchbodywhichpromotes  effectiveandsensibleapproachestoAmerica'sjustice t system._JPI_Ԁhasconsistentlypromotedarationalcriminal ` justiceagendathroughpolicyformulation,research,media L  events,educationandpublicspeaking.Throughvigorous 8  publiceducationefforts,_JPI_Ԁhasbeenfeaturedinthenational $ t media.TheInstituteincludesanationalpanelofadvisorsto  ` formulateandpromotepublicpolicyintheareaofjuvenile  L  andcriminaljustice._JPI_Ԁconductsresearch,proffersmodel  8  legislation,andtakesanactiveroleinpromotingarational $  criminaljusticediscourseintheelectronicandprintmedia.#!X XXYXb#X8X X!X    @XJuvenileRightsAdvocacyProject      TheJuvenileRightsAdvocacyProjectisacurricular   basedlawclinicatBostonCollegeLawSchoolrepresenting p youthatBrightonHighSchoolinBostonaswellas \ representingandadvocatingforequitablepoliciesforgirlsin H thecriminalandjuvenilejusticesystems.Inourindividual 4 representationandpolicyworkonbehalfofgirlswe  p encounterschoolfailureasaprimarypathwayintothejustice  \ system. 4  `  H   LawyersForChildren    B  #!X XXX8]#_XbX X!XLawyersforChildren(_LFC_),foundedin1984,is   dedicatedtoprotectingandpromotingthehealthandwelfare  ofvulnerablechildren._LFC_Ԁprovidesfree,integratedlegal  andsocialworkservicestoover4,000individualchildrenper  year,inavarietyoflegalcontexts.Inaddition,_LFC_Ԁpublishes l guidebooksandothermaterialsforbothchildrenandlegal X  practitioners,conductsprofessionaltrainingsessions,and D! seekssystemicimprovementofsystemsaffectingvulnerable 0"  children._LFC_Ԁstaffhaveconsultedtootherchildfocused #l! organizationsthroughoutthecountry.ItsofficesareinNew $X" York,NewYork.  $D # _   NationalCenterforYouthLaw     TheNationalCenterforYouthLaw(NCYL)isaprivate,  nonprofitlegalorganizationdevotedtoimprovingthelives  ofpoorchildrenintheUnitedStates.Formorethan25 t years,NCYLhasprovidedsupportservicestochild ` advocatesnationwideanddirectrepresentationincases L  involvingchildwelfare,publicbenefitsforchildrenandtheir 8  families,legalissuesinvolvingchildandadolescenthealth, $ t fairhousingforfamilieswithchildren,andjuvenilejustice.  ` Inparticular,NCYLhasparticipatedinlitigationfocusedon  L  theneedsofyouthinthejuvenilejusticesystemthroughout  8  thecountry.NCYLalsoengagesinpolicyanalysis,and $  administrativeandlegislativeadvocacy,onbothstateand   nationallevels.      TheSentencingProject      TheSentencingProjectisanationalnonprofit p organizationwhichsince1986haschallengedoverreliance \ upontheuseofjailsandprisonsandpromotedalternativesto H incarceration.Itsstaff,advisorsandconsultantshaveclosely 4 observedallaspectsofthecriminaljusticeandcorrections  p processes.TheSentencingProjecthaspublishedsomeofthe  \ mostwidelyreadresearchandinformationaboutsentencing H andincarceration,includingdocumentationofahighly 4 disproportionateminorityrepresentationinthecriminal   justicesystem,theunprecedentedgrowthoftheAmerican   prisonpopulationwithinthelast30years,andtherelative  benefitsofusingtherapeutictreatment,rehabilitation,and  socialprogramstoreducecrime.Inrecentyears,asdirect,  nonjudiciallyreviewedreferraltoadultcriminalcourtof l juvenileageddefendantshasincreased,TheSentencing X  Projecthasprovidedguidancetoadvocatesandinformation D! topolicymakersintendedtolimitthispractice. 0"    #l!  #!X XX_Xb#YXbX X!X  UniversityoftheDistrictofColumbia,  JuvenileLawClinic#!X XXYXb#YXbX X!XԀ #!X XXYXbM#_XbX X!X  γ  FacultyandstudentsintheJuvenileLawClinicofthe  UniversityoftheDistrictofColumbiaDavidA.Clarke t SchoolofLawrepresentchildrenindelinquencymatters, ` childrenandparentsinneglectandspecialeducationmatters L  intheDistrictofColumbia. 8     YouthLawCenter   ` M  TheYouthLawCenter(YLC)isanationalpublicinterest  L  lawfirmwithofficesinSanFranciscoandWashington,DC,  8  thathasworkedsince1978onbehalfofchildreninjuvenile $  justiceandchildwelfaresystems.YLChasworkedwith   judges,prosecutors,defensecounsel,probationdepartments,   correctionsofficials,sheriffs,police,legislators,community   groups,parents,attorneys,andotherchildadvocatesin   Californiaandthroughoutthecountry,providingpublic p education,training,technicalassistance,legislativeand \ administrativeadvocacy,andlitigationtoprotectchildren H fromviolationoftheircivilandconstitutionalrights.YLC 4 hasworkedformorethantwodecadestopromote  p individualizedtreatmentandrehabilitativegoalsinthe  \ juvenilejusticesystem,protectionofdueprocessrightsof H youthatrisk,effectiveprogramsandservicesforyouthat 4 riskandintrouble,considerationofthedevelopmental   differencesbetweenchildrenandadults,andracialfairnessin   thejusticesystem.YLChasalsoworkedonissuesinvolving  civilandconstitutionalrightsofchildreninschool,andon  theconsequencesofsearchesanddisciplinaryproceduresthat  resultinstudentsbeingreferredtothejuvenilejusticesystem. l Therefore,YLCisparticularlyinterestedintheissuesinthis X  case. D! #!X XX_Xb#X8X X!X  0"  @ X LawProfessors     AssociateProfessor#!X XXX8#X8X X!XTheresaGlennonoftheJamesE.  BeasleySchoolofLawofTempleUniversity.Sheteaches,  conductsresearch,publishesandspeaksonthelegalrightsof t childrenandyouth,specializingineducationandfamilylaw. ` From19851989,shewasanattorneyattheEducationLaw L  Center,aprivate,nonprofitadvocacyorganizationforthe 8  educationalrightsofchildren.#!X XXX8q#_XbX X!X   h  $ t   ProfessorMartinGuggenheimoftheNewYork  L  UniversitySchoolofLaw(NYU)isamongthenationspre  8  eminentscholars,teachersandpractitionersintheareaof $  childrenslaw.AtNYU,heisDirectorofClinicaland   AdvocacyPrograms,ExecutiveDirectorofWashington   SquareLegalServices(NYUsfreelegalservicesprogram),   andSupervisingAttorneyofNYUsFamilyDefenseClinic,   whichseekstoprotectvulnerablefamiliesfromunwarranted p governmentalintrusion.HedirectedNYUsJuvenileRights \ Clinicforfifteenyears,andcurrentlyteachesaseminar H entitledChild,Parent&Statethatexploressuchissuesasthe 4 rightsofyoungpeopleandthebasesforaccordingyoung  p peoplerightsthatadultshaveundertheConstitution.Asa  \ probonoadvocateforchildren,ProfessorGuggenheimhas H litigatedinnumerablecasesinthestateandfederalcourts, 4 andservedaschiefcounselforthefollowingthreecasesin   theUnitedStatesSupremeCourt:Schallv.Martin,467U.S.   253(1984),Lehmanv.LycomingCountyChildrensServices  Agency,458U.S.502(1982),andSantoskyv.Kramer,455  U.S.745(1982).ProfessorGuggenheimservesonnumerous  nationalandregionalboardsofdirectorsandadvisorsfor l organizationsandprojectsinvolvingchildren. X    ProfessorRandyHertzoftheNewYorkUniversity 0"  SchoolofLaw(NYU)isalsoamongthecountrysleading #l! scholarsandteachersintheareaofchildrenandthelaw.He $X" istheSupervisingAttorneyofNYUsJuvenileRights_Clinic, $D # andtheEditor_InChief_ԀoftheClinicalLawReview,a  national,peerreviewedscholarlyjournal.ProfessorHertzis  acurrentorformermemberofnumerousprofessional  organizationsaimedatimprovingtheadministrationof t justiceforchildren.Hehaspublishedmanybooksand ` articlesonsubjectsincludingthelegalneedsofyoung L  people.Heisthe2000recipientoftheAmericanBar 8  Associations_Livingston_ԀHallAwardforJuvenileJustice $ t Advocacy.  ` #!X XX_Xb#X8X X!X  ProfessorWallace_Mlyniec_istheAssociateDeanof  8  ClinicalEducationandPublicServicePrograms,_Lupo_Ԅ_Ricci_ $  ProfessorofClinicalLegalStudies,andDirectorofthe   JuvenileJusticeClinicatGeorgetownUniversityLaw   Center.HeteachescoursesinFamilyLawandchildrens   rightsandassistswiththetrainingofcriminaldefenseand   juveniledefensefellowsinthe_Prettyman_ԀLegalInternship p Program.Heistheauthorofnumerousbooksandarticles \ concerningcriminallawandthelawrelatingtochildrenand H families.Wallace_Mlyniec_ԀreceivedaBicentennial 4 FellowshipfromtheSwedishgovernmentofstudytheirchild  p welfaresystem,theStuartStillerAwardforpublicservice,  \ andtheWilliam_Pincus_Ԁawardforcontributionstoclinical H education.HeholdshisB.S.fromNorthwesternUniversity 4 andhisJ.D.fromGeorgetownUniversity.     ProfessorFrancineShermanhastaughtjuvenilejusticeat  BostonCollegeLawSchoolforthepastnineyears,andhas  beendirectingtheJuvenileRightsAdvocacyProjectatthe  lawschoolsinceitwaslaunchedin1995.Sheisalsothe l DirectoroftheBostonCollegeCenterforChild,Familyand X  CommunityPartnerships.ProfessorShermanrepresentsgirls D! intheMassachusettsjuvenilejusticesystemandadvocates 0"  forstatesystemreformthatwillimproverepresentationfor #l! girlsandintegratestatesystemsservicinggirls.  $X"   ProfessorJosephB._Tulman_isaProfessorofLawand  ClinicalDirectorattheUniversityoftheDistrictof  Columbia,DavidA.ClarkeSchoolofLaw(UDC_DCSL_).  Since1988,hehasdirectorthelawschoolsJuvenileLaw t Clinic.In1995,hereceivedthelawschoolsdistinguished ` serviceaward.Professor_Tulman_,since1987,hasbeen L  counselforplaintiffsinEvansv.Williams,aclassactionof 8  behalfofpersonswithmentalretardation.Thesuit,filedin $ t 1976ledtotheclosingin1991ofForestHaven,alarge  ` institution.Anagreement,filedbytheEvanspartiesin2001,  L  establishesandfundsanonprofitorganization(TheQuality  8  TrustforIndividualswithDisabilities)toadvancethe $  interestsofpeoplewithdisabilitiesinD.C.Withhis   colleaguesintheUDC_DCSL_ԀJuvenileLawClinic,Mr.   _Tulman_Ԁhaspioneeredtheuseofspecialeducationadvocacy   forchildrenintheneglectanddelinquencysystems.His   publicationsincludearticlesregardingtheunnecessary p detentionofchildren,andhecoauthoredandcoed_ited_Ԁa \ comprehensivemanualregardingtheuseofspecialeducation H advocacyforchildreninthedelinquencysystem#!X XXX8 #