Now, onto the regularly scheduled post: Last night I got into an pretty epic battle on Facebook regarding if drug testing of welfare recipients was constitutional. I wish I had access to Facebook at work because I’d totally post the entire thread, but it basically came down to one guy arguing the idea that the courts had already said that the government can’t drug test without a compelling reason, and that me arguing that the law would pass the strict scrutiny standard if I argued it in front of the Supreme Court. There was another gentleman somewhere in the mix who ended up calling me the scum of the earth because I am apparently discriminating against the poor by suggesting that this law is not only constitutional, but perhaps isn’t so bad.
First, I’m going to give you guys some required reading (all links open in a new tab):
Alabama Legislators Consider Drug Testing Welfare Recipients
Welfare Drug Test Results Preditable
Law Makers Ideas To Drug Test Welfare Recipients May Face Legal Hurdles
Drug Testing the Poor: Bad Policy, Worse Law
Now that you’ve hopefully read all my required reading, you have a somewhat educated opinion of where this debate is headed. Now, pick one of these two questions to answer:
Do you support laws that require people to be screened for drugs before going on welfare?
Do you think such laws are constitutional or not?
I will respond to everyone who comments in the comments with my own counter argument, even if I don’t believe what I’m saying, and tomorrow morning, I will post my real view on the issue.