JFIFC    $ &%# #"(-90(*6+"#2D26;=@@@&0FKE>J9?@=C  =)#)==================================================a" }!1AQa"q2#BR$3br %&'()*456789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz w!1AQaq"2B #3Rbr $4%&'()*56789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz ?Crp Rqfl4Xm] xo»{TNPѿx`ޮsmҤB~}ERNȭ\nDrNT.ymn٥.Nmۍ`Wyz~aw#ff1M|IS`jJ+}wZt < :x'Jִ.<ԑ%hvF<}jaXRr\M())3TҡKpY1/^؍gNJue*`89y?9W3Is,ҢSV<_q`X-U-R,Zg1gVƑ~mu[{,n18[YQT8sJVTHMҫgX9($OLG * h6y 88?tzg$bSB}2SdBhRێ?sSJUR:-C4)\f@}Bk.]EрTar0G0 1G4o#\TRe>c%^9U@.#+<+tnُ,6xyA,r:t%4ԷHf-!-^~kunc˾ƯîA%b21ҹ2Eݘ am\xA3;{ U8%ųHG.Heh /8S&&OFf35ȷ?)$kY\G䍠$s>IXf];@8T!Hpy ȮƓz6}H$ 6C>oCaZE%a\zuѱf+k$I"!F{r.RSJr ҔV _v?c\G$'Ĝ\D<>2OBR[&-;{B4@8nmEީp쏭t(&\;s5' Z7p9#qڨCJwHx'ҧY7z}gsLi\ )jmx}iRk$Q>V L/m\g'Qw}8\V,h@aʖv㢲hMZM6GiqQԺŲ r]MǔߝC{ųD889k97vt]!ٷg4rA\r89LU0OιS*g˟Jz nQ&N AW=U$}c^|f',jznP_=sڡJ\̩}P|׮|÷Pj 2IduTU=4;`PivPZOQ.ծvV5jwѵѤ0.H WGl#Uéܟ_梒~23Sy?wg-Zsȟm?GYx}^Ъ^r~4ٿanisIoU;[|d VuĮє,̤`hSVǭJ8MFT(Aw08[h¿H6݄\ZJ`usd.h5«^8*{DQUp3U66nR(ugP`c4'=:ai_c%w$'r@ I jk3hw$ ({̼byjy#\ƛ7kNk֨5:w2s8Q}k^5(VA$(7&85_xcY՞0b,1+M[v,d=+:p5E.iY94ƈ /ݍiDM̀9Q#2}iGj0UM]yz- GaJ)»9N6jdLS&GAҦmE\֌IXmM;&_[ \ragF@5 ԴhLUt}6 ΅[Ǔ V9tV aI0ggϒRU R5 n!4VU)ǖEn.譻#uSw̜?h*j^a۱z-OE?baҤsˑ (27Tv(;p;_?i^cC4Q_5+> 8ޓK 9?Tï[e_.?S+ ([/NJTu~}(ik!K/ֺf)cќoFzE}N>O2"i<;E=(̸6.K/-Y_qdx5vV*^Q\`dm#Yb3dNzfQN炪rJ2F*U.Y]"fOyoܫ`:X>OOxT!Xc³tkf d/O?jLJ-y b@rU=N)Ԅ)FËP oe{;k' [lzV +I6t*Urx-Qhm" !t{{*>rB6Ԫ<`vT5$v,RGc&BMsY$%7A$"$ Xdǜ=F"֖Y n4_ZFy(FPCh5-cLL vezgpGw a|+˫?1քqNYqq>TwV#I<3(֫1V-YLi ;5/5S^Fl~f**b*&Tbk_|= 85lrB GR-d!h.)NN _E*3/^i6yl Ea= 54xry=k>XH(̛#k, 0Fǚϝ폒:֊+Xn>WP~O@˻h>qI\z4QEgv3the Supreme Court ruled that drug testing student athletes was legal. The case name was Veronia School District vs. Acton. An official investigation led to the discovery that the high school athletes of Veronia School District participated in the use of illegal drugs. School officials were concerned that drug use increased the risk of sports related injury. The school district adopted a student athlete drug testing policy which authorized random urinalysis drug testing of its student athletes. James Acton, a student, was denied participation in his high school football program when he and his parents refused to consent to the testing.<br><br>The constitutional question was:  Does random drug testing of high school athletes violate the reasonable search and seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment? The conclusion by the court was that it did not violate these rights. In the case of high school athletes, under the state s supervision, during school hours, they are subject to greater control than other free adults. The privacy interests comprised by urine samples are negligible since the conditions of collection are similar to public restrooms, and the results are viewed by limited authorities. The court also stated that governmental concern over the safety of minors, under their supervision, overrides intrusion of the student-<br>athlete s privacy.<br>This case answers the question about drug testing student-athletes, but the question of testing the total school population is still open to the court.<br><br>Summary<br><br>More and more schools, in Arkansas, have been going to the drug testing program, not only to test athletes, but to test total school population.<br><br>The teachers have developed a growing concern about drug testing and infringement on teachers rights for privacy. After the student survey went out, the Personnel Policy Committee sent out their own survey to the teachers. Now we will have a chance to see how teachers will react to the possibility of being tested. Let s see if they can behave as well as their students.to