skip to content »

Mandating drug

mandating drug-15

Those who fail the required drug testing may designate another individual to receive the benefits on behalf of their children.Enforcement of the Florida law was temporarily halted in October 2011 through a temporary injunction issued by a federal judge after the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit on behalf of a Florida resident who was denied benefits when he refused to take a drug test, arguing that mandatory drug testing of welfare recipients without probable cause violated the constitutional prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures: A federal judge in Orlando temporarily blocked Florida’s controversial law requiring welfare applicants be drug tested in order to receive benefits.

mandating drug-76mandating drug-2

Such blanket intrusions cannot be countenanced under the Fourth Amendment.” A U. judge has struck down a Florida law requiring drug screening for welfare recipients, saying that it violated the constitutional protection against unreasonable searches. District Judge Mary Scriven permanently halted enforcement of the law in her ruling.The bill was merely a proposal which was introduced to one house of the state legislature and was not brought to a vote.According to the [Louisville] Courier-Journal: The [bill’s] sponsor, Lancaster Republican Lonnie Napier, said in an interview that he plans to amend the bill to allow those who fail the drug tests to continue receiving assistance if they agree to undergo state-paid substance abuse treatment.Executive Order 12564--Drug-free Federal workplace Source: The provisions of Executive Order 12564 of Sept.15, 1986, appear at 51 FR 32889, 3 CFR, 1986 Comp., p. I, RONALD REAGAN, President of the United States of America, find that: Drug use is having serious adverse effects upon a significant proportion of the national work force and results in billions of dollars of lost productivity each year; The Federal government, as an employer, is concerned with the well-being of its employees, the successful accomplishment of agency missions, and the need to maintain employee productivity; The Federal government, as the largest employer in the Nation, can and should show the way towards achieving drug-free workplaces through a program designed to offer drug users a helping hand and, at the same time, demonstrating to drug users and potential drug users that drugs will not be tolerated in the Federal workplace; The profits from illegal drugs provide the single greatest source of income for organized crime, fuel violent street crime, and otherwise contribute to the breakdown of our society; The use of illegal drugs, on or off duty, by Federal employees is inconsistent not only with the law-abiding behavior expected of all citizens, but also with the special trust placed in such employees as servants of the public; Federal employees who use illegal drugs, on or off duty, tend to be less productive, less reliable, and prone to greater absenteeism than their fellow employees who do not use illegal drugs; The use of illegal drugs, on or off duty, by Federal employees impairs the efficiency of Federal departments and agencies, undermines public confidence in them, and makes it more difficult for other employees who do not use illegal drugs to perform their jobs effectively.Judge Mary Scriven issued a temporary injunction against the state, writing in a order that the law could violate the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on illegal search and seizure.

In her order, Scriven issued a scathing assessment of the state’s argument in favor of the drug tests, saying the state failed to prove “special needs” as to why it should conduct such searches without probable cause or reasonable suspicion, as the law requires.

In May 2012, Oklahoma passed a law requiring welfare applicants to be screened for possible drug use and drug tested upon suspicion they are using.

They would be denied benefits if they test positive.

(d) The results of testing conducted under this subsection shall not be admissible in any criminal proceeding without the consent of the person tested.

However, contrary to what was stated in the Facebook-circulated example cited above, it is false to say that Kentucky “passed” such a law.

I’ve regularly seen this post today on Facebook: “Kentucky just passed a great law. Florida is the first state as of June 1, 2011- Hooray for Florida! It’s completely legal that every other working person had to pass a drug test in order to have a On 7 January 2011, HB208 was introduced to the Kentucky state legislature’s House of Representatives.