By Richard Blair, The All Spin Zone
Posted on November 27, 2007, Printed on November 27, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://allspinzone.com/wp//68989/
This post, written by Richard Blair, originally appeared on The All Spin Zone
With their refusal to hear a San Diego County case yesterday regarding unannounced searching of homes of public assistance applicants, the Supreme Court once again turned noted English jurist William Blackstone on his head. In the view of the Roberts court, it is better that ten truly needy people suffer than one potential fraudster escape.
Back in the mid-1980's, when big companies started requiring employees to submit to random drug and alcohol screenings, it was quite apparent that privacy and fourth amendment constitutional protections were under serious attack. There were two lines of reasoning that courts eventually approved of the screenings -- workplace safety and, hey, if someone didn't want to submit to the testing, they were free to quit the job.
No comments:
Post a Comment