Let's see if I understand this argument. It's not Jason's smoking that keeps him off the football team, it's the test. And of course, if we don't permit Jason to break team rules and state laws, then he'll end up being a lawbreaker.
"Rights" as outlined in the Constitution and elsewhere are important. I get so tired of legitimite rights being trivialized by those who think there should be no laws and no rules, or at least no penalties for breaking them. What "rights" are being violated by the tests? The "right" to break the state law? The "right" to ignore the football team rules? The "right" of children to addict themselves?
None. The Supreme Court has ruled as such. I'm not sure what the "violating kid's rights" crowd is getting at. Maybe they missed last year's case.
4th Amendment rights. The state, through its agents is conducting searches with neither probable cause nor a warrant.
Some will say children have no rights. That's what the "It Takes a Village" crowd would like you to believe. Children do have unalienable rights, but because they are minors they lack legal capacity to exercise them. Their rights are instead held and exercised by proxy by their parents or legal guardians. If the parent exercises the child's 4th Amendment right, then no probable cause and no warrant means no search.
Some will say students voluntarily waive their 4th Amendment rights by asking to participate in extra-curricular activities. They forget, this is the state we are dealing with, not a privately funded school. The state has no legitimate power to barter rights for tax sponsored priviliges. This ignores the unalienable nature of rights, and uses taxation as a lever to coerce forfeiture of rights. It is akin to forcing those who get drivers licenses to forfeit freedom of speech or religion.
And finally some will say the courts have ruled otherwise so it is a mute issue. To them, I remind them of Roe v Wade, and even slavery. The courts are wrong there and they're wrong here too. In fact, the courts are wrong so often and hold such deep contempt for the Constitution they are sworn to uphold, that they have undermined their legitimate authority to the point where their opinion is worth no more than that of your common man-on-the-street. The only difference being that these black robed princes have the power to back their whimiscal, illegitimate opinions with brute force. It is now fear, not respect for law that they wield.