by Karen Moore

Created on: June 04, 2008   Last Updated: July 11, 2010

The fourth amendment of the Constitution, or any other amendment for that matter, does not apply to random drug testing of police officers. The Constitution is a guarantee for the citizens of this country from the government and the amendments set forth specific rights of the people, with rules for the government that protect those rights. Random drug testing is an administrative employment procedure and therefore does not fall under the protections granted by the Constitution.

Upon accepting employment with any law enforcement agency, officers agree to abide by the policies and procedures of that department, to include any new policies and procedures deemed necessary. Regardless of where one is employed, random drug testing procedures should be predicated with written guidelines so every employee is aware of the procedure. Some may argue that drug testing violates search and seizure rights, but those rights do not apply when the matter is a civil contractual agreement between the employee and the employer when the first pay check is cashed. The employee has consented to the matter as a condition of employment. Having a job in law enforcement is not a right but a privilege, which adds to the civil nature of the matter. Even if the constitution did apply, anyone can give consent to allow a search whether or not probable cause exists.

One may argue that the consent is coerced by the nature of the job, but that is why this matter falls under civil guidelines not constitutional. As a police officer, random drug testing should be welcomed to abolish any rumor that officers are under the influence of any illegal substance. Mandatory drug testing after any incident that could give rise to a civil suit or criminal allegation should also be viewed as a step toward quashing claims asserted in frivolous law suits. Officers involved in car accidents (especially when they work from a vehicle) should ask for a drug test to show they were not impaired at the time of the accident. Officers involved in any shooting incident should demand a drug test as soon as possible after the incident. What is not done at the time of the incident is open for argument in the future and much harder to prove in favor of the officer.

Civil lawsuits have a lower level of proof than a criminal trial. Doubt is easily introduced. Random drug testing requirements by an employer not only protect the employer but the employee. The majority of officers who have nothing to hide, that comply with random drug testing have not lost their constitutional rights, but help reinforce trust from the public in their government.

Learn more about this author, Karen Moore.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.