President Donald Trump delivers remarks following a meeting on infrastructure at Trump Tower on August 15, 2017 in New York City. (Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
'Degrading' and 'Unconstitutional': Trump Reviewing Rule That Would Allow Drug Testing for Unemployment Benefits
"This type of futile and unconstitutional intrusion into people's privacy simply because they are out of work is unacceptable."
The Trump White House is reportedly reviewing a Labor Department rule that would give states the power to force people to pass a drug test before they can receive unemployment benefits, ignoring protests that such screenings would amount to demeaning and unconstitutional invasions of privacy.
"The rule itself would not automatically impose drug tests on the jobless but would let states screen people who file claims for unemployment benefits--fulfilling a GOP dream from the Obama years," HuffPost's Arthur Delaney reported. "In the wake of the Great Recession, after the national unemployment rate surged to 10 percent, several Republican-led states clamored for the right to obtain the bodily fluids of people laid off through no fault of their own."
The proposed rule was published the Federal Register last November and immediately came under fire from the ACLU and worker advocacy groups, which condemned the measure as overly broad and likely illegal. The Labor Department finalized the rule last week after a public comment period and sent it to the White House for review.
"The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches by the government. Courts have said drug testing is a search and subject to Fourth Amendment protections," the ACLU's Kanya Bennett and Charlotte Resing wrote in a blog post earlier this year. "So unless there are probable cause and individualized suspicion, there should be no search."
"Exceptions to this rule have been made when the government can show it has a 'special need' and that need outweighs individual privacy rights, but that is not the case here either," they added. "Simply put, the government is on very shaky ground if it thinks it can subject the unemployed to blanket drug testing."
In addition to constitutional concerns, Bennett and Resing also argued the Trump administration's rule would add "an unnecessary and degrading toll to the existing stigma of being out of work."
"Blanket drug testing just further demeans people who the government has no reason to suspect of using drugs," said Bennett and Resing. "This type of futile and unconstitutional intrusion into people's privacy simply because they are out of work is unacceptable."
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just two days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The Trump White House is reportedly reviewing a Labor Department rule that would give states the power to force people to pass a drug test before they can receive unemployment benefits, ignoring protests that such screenings would amount to demeaning and unconstitutional invasions of privacy.
"The rule itself would not automatically impose drug tests on the jobless but would let states screen people who file claims for unemployment benefits--fulfilling a GOP dream from the Obama years," HuffPost's Arthur Delaney reported. "In the wake of the Great Recession, after the national unemployment rate surged to 10 percent, several Republican-led states clamored for the right to obtain the bodily fluids of people laid off through no fault of their own."
The proposed rule was published the Federal Register last November and immediately came under fire from the ACLU and worker advocacy groups, which condemned the measure as overly broad and likely illegal. The Labor Department finalized the rule last week after a public comment period and sent it to the White House for review.
"The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches by the government. Courts have said drug testing is a search and subject to Fourth Amendment protections," the ACLU's Kanya Bennett and Charlotte Resing wrote in a blog post earlier this year. "So unless there are probable cause and individualized suspicion, there should be no search."
"Exceptions to this rule have been made when the government can show it has a 'special need' and that need outweighs individual privacy rights, but that is not the case here either," they added. "Simply put, the government is on very shaky ground if it thinks it can subject the unemployed to blanket drug testing."
In addition to constitutional concerns, Bennett and Resing also argued the Trump administration's rule would add "an unnecessary and degrading toll to the existing stigma of being out of work."
"Blanket drug testing just further demeans people who the government has no reason to suspect of using drugs," said Bennett and Resing. "This type of futile and unconstitutional intrusion into people's privacy simply because they are out of work is unacceptable."
The Trump White House is reportedly reviewing a Labor Department rule that would give states the power to force people to pass a drug test before they can receive unemployment benefits, ignoring protests that such screenings would amount to demeaning and unconstitutional invasions of privacy.
"The rule itself would not automatically impose drug tests on the jobless but would let states screen people who file claims for unemployment benefits--fulfilling a GOP dream from the Obama years," HuffPost's Arthur Delaney reported. "In the wake of the Great Recession, after the national unemployment rate surged to 10 percent, several Republican-led states clamored for the right to obtain the bodily fluids of people laid off through no fault of their own."
The proposed rule was published the Federal Register last November and immediately came under fire from the ACLU and worker advocacy groups, which condemned the measure as overly broad and likely illegal. The Labor Department finalized the rule last week after a public comment period and sent it to the White House for review.
"The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches by the government. Courts have said drug testing is a search and subject to Fourth Amendment protections," the ACLU's Kanya Bennett and Charlotte Resing wrote in a blog post earlier this year. "So unless there are probable cause and individualized suspicion, there should be no search."
"Exceptions to this rule have been made when the government can show it has a 'special need' and that need outweighs individual privacy rights, but that is not the case here either," they added. "Simply put, the government is on very shaky ground if it thinks it can subject the unemployed to blanket drug testing."
In addition to constitutional concerns, Bennett and Resing also argued the Trump administration's rule would add "an unnecessary and degrading toll to the existing stigma of being out of work."
"Blanket drug testing just further demeans people who the government has no reason to suspect of using drugs," said Bennett and Resing. "This type of futile and unconstitutional intrusion into people's privacy simply because they are out of work is unacceptable."