October Term 2001 · Docket 01-332

Can schools test athletes for drugs?

A school district seeks to test students in sports. Lindsay Earls argues this violates her rights.

Official caption
Board of Ed. Dist. No. 92 of Pottawatomie Cty. v. Earls
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    The district claims a reasonable drug threat allows testing athletes.

    Earls contends random testing without suspicion violates her rights.

    The district cites a five percent drug use rate in its surveys.

    The Court questioned the accuracy of the district's reported statistics.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case tests the limits of school authority. It asks if random drug tests for athletes fit the Constitution.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 19, 2002.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The district wants to keep its drug testing program for student athletes.

Earls wants the Court to strike down the testing policy as unconstitutional.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The district argues that a reasonable drug threat justifies testing competitive students.

Earls argues that random testing without individual suspicion violates her privacy rights.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Does a school's drug problem justify testing athletes without individual suspicion?

How does the district's reported drug use rate affect the reasonableness of the test?

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the scope of school authority over student privacy. It sets the standard for testing students in extracurricular activities. The outcome shapes how schools manage safety and constitutional rights.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON