Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
Wed Dec 3, 2014, 05:55 PM Dec 2014

Federal appeals court shoots down Rick Scott's drug testing law for welfare applicants

A federal appeals court on Wednesday said a Florida law requiring applicants for welfare benefits to undergo mandatory drug testing is unconstitutional, a decision that could affect efforts to enforce similar laws in other states.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Florida did not show a “substantial special need” to test all applicants to its Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program without any suspicion of drug use. The federally subsidized program was intended to help people pay for food, shelter and other necessities.

“By virtue of poverty, TANF applicants are not stripped of their legitimate expectations of privacy,” Circuit Judge Stanley Marcus wrote for a three-judge panel. “If we are to give meaning to the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on blanket government searches, we must – and we do – hold that (the law) crosses the constitutional line.”

The decision upheld a ruling last December by U.S. District Judge Mary Scriven in Tampa, Florida to permanently halt enforcement of the July 2011 law.


http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/us-appeals-court-voids-floridas-unconstitutional-welfare-drug-testing-law/
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Federal appeals court shoots down Rick Scott's drug testing law for welfare applicants (Original Post) davidn3600 Dec 2014 OP
Amazing RockaFowler Dec 2014 #1
Good next they can work on employee drug testing except in cases of.. Kalidurga Dec 2014 #2
The Constitution protects us from government drug testing, but not from employer drug testing. Comrade Grumpy Dec 2014 #5
except where the government IS the empolyer Sheepshank Dec 2014 #7
time to drug test prickscott and onethatcares Dec 2014 #3
Drug testing winetourdriver Dec 2014 #4
I understand the impulse, but no. Drug testing is a humiliating invasion of privacy. Comrade Grumpy Dec 2014 #6
it's enforced to keep the lackeys in fear onethatcares Dec 2014 #8
We love to live in an authoritarian nation. Rex Dec 2014 #9
He wouldn't care Mnpaul Dec 2014 #10

Kalidurga

(14,177 posts)
2. Good next they can work on employee drug testing except in cases of..
Wed Dec 3, 2014, 05:57 PM
Dec 2014

where an employee will be expected to operate a vehicle or other heavy equipment.

 

Comrade Grumpy

(13,184 posts)
5. The Constitution protects us from government drug testing, but not from employer drug testing.
Wed Dec 3, 2014, 06:21 PM
Dec 2014

You have to negotiate that with your employer. Having a union would be helpful, then it could be a collective bargaining issue. Otherwise, it's just you against the boss.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
7. except where the government IS the empolyer
Wed Dec 3, 2014, 06:27 PM
Dec 2014

the standard and expectation of privacy, I assume is different for welfare recipients than it is for employees.

onethatcares

(16,178 posts)
3. time to drug test prickscott and
Wed Dec 3, 2014, 06:13 PM
Dec 2014

the entire florida legislature. They work for we the people and I for one would like to make certain none of them are under the
influence of any mind altering substance while they have the important work of governing for we the people.

Once a month.

 

winetourdriver

(196 posts)
4. Drug testing
Wed Dec 3, 2014, 06:19 PM
Dec 2014

Damn straight, congress too, think Boner stumbling his way to the office, reeking of (expensive) booze.

 

Comrade Grumpy

(13,184 posts)
6. I understand the impulse, but no. Drug testing is a humiliating invasion of privacy.
Wed Dec 3, 2014, 06:23 PM
Dec 2014

Why it is broadly accepted in this country is beyond me.

onethatcares

(16,178 posts)
8. it's enforced to keep the lackeys in fear
Wed Dec 3, 2014, 07:39 PM
Dec 2014

I just want sauce for the gander.

And,

We employ these people that pass laws that stomp on the rights of we the people.

Turn about is fair play in my book.

Yes, it is a humiliating invasion of privacy. Do you think Mitch McTurtle cares? How about Eric Cantor

or PrickScott, or Scotty Walker? Of course they don't give a rats ass because they know it doesn't apply to them.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
9. We love to live in an authoritarian nation.
Wed Dec 3, 2014, 07:41 PM
Dec 2014

Otherwise the War on Drugs would have ended a long time ago imo.

Mnpaul

(3,655 posts)
10. He wouldn't care
Wed Dec 3, 2014, 08:13 PM
Dec 2014

and his wife would be laughing all the way to the bank with all those new customers.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Federal appeals court sho...