Florida Law on Drug Testing for Welfare Is Struck Down
Source: NY Times
KEY WEST A federal judge in Orlando struck down a Florida law on Tuesday that required welfare recipients to undergo mandatory drug testing.
Judge Mary S. Scriven of United States District Court wrote in her decision that the states testing requirement was unconstitutional. The court finds there is no set of circumstances under which the warrantless, suspicionless drug testing at issue in this case could be constitutionally applied, she wrote. The ruling made permanent an earlier, temporary ban by the judge.
The requirement had been a signature legislation of Gov. Rick Scott, who argued that the drug testing was necessary to help protect taxpayers and families. Mr. Scott said Tuesday that the state would appeal the ruling.
Any illegal drug use in a family is harmful and even abusive to a child, he said in a statement. We should have a zero-tolerance policy for illegal drug use in families especially those families who struggle to make ends meet and need welfare assistance to provide for their children.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/01/us/florida-law-on-drug-testing-for-welfare-is-struck-down.html?hp
Enrique
(27,461 posts)has he been asked?
meow2u3
(24,774 posts)But blanket drug testing welfare recipients without either a warrant nor suspicion sends the message that poor people don't have constitutional rights against unreasonable, warrantless searches. Good call on the part of the judge.
seattledo
(295 posts)is morally and legally wrong.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)The number of people on welfare that test positive is tiny. How in he** do these politicians think that someone who is barely putting a roof over their heads and food on the table can afford illegal drugs?
It is because in their minds anyone on any form of public assistance is a "taker" that is scamming the system. I hear the stories about people on SNAP purchasing lobsters, having the latest clothes and handbags and driving Escalades. That is pure fantasy.
Of course there are scammers. We have hundreds of thousands of them in New York on Wall Street. You deal with the scammers but you don't punish the deserving.
Pope Francis has it right - the wealthy should beware because they are not going to enter heaven if they deny food, housing, healthcare and opportunity to the poor.
canuckledragger
(1,670 posts)It was all about Rick Scott profiting from the testing itself via some of the companies contracted out for the testing he owned.
King_Klonopin
(1,307 posts)Cha
(297,888 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)This is how pols "do good". They won't make enough money "doing bad", don't "do bad", and that translates into "doing good."
jaysunb
(11,856 posts)bobGandolf
(871 posts)Shrike47
(6,913 posts)I guess child abuse by substance abuse ( as defined by the governor) is OK if you're an affluent Republican, but terrible if you are poor or minority.
Hypocrit, hypocrit, hypocrit.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)against the right wing gestapo laws.
alp227
(32,068 posts)so there are legit libertarian arguments against such law.
boblgumm
(23 posts)But turning down federal assistance for health care (not to mention mass transit) is not criminally abusive to a child?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Welcome to DU.
Gothmog
(145,751 posts)Scott is a mean person and this law was a bad idea. Hopefully, this failure will hurt Scott in the 2014 governor's race
Blue Owl
(50,536 posts)n/t
frylock
(34,825 posts)Aristus
(66,487 posts)How about a little "everybody mind their own fucking business"?
Unless we extend the testing to everyone drawing on public funds, like Congressmembers (!), let's just leave the issue the fuck alone...
mountain grammy
(26,663 posts)Judge Mary S. Scriven of United States District Court wrote in her decision that the states testing requirement was unconstitutional. The court finds there is no set of circumstances under which the warrantless, suspicionless drug testing at issue in this case could be constitutionally applied, she wrote. The ruling made permanent an earlier, temporary ban by the judge.
Indeed!
saluda
(2 posts)how about legislators find some full time living wage jobs, so we won't have to be on any form of welfare, and therefore be able to take as much or no drugs as we see fit! i like the mind your own biz meme!
HAPPY NEW YEAR, YALL!
nakocal
(558 posts)Why would anyone vote for this criminal. He help defraud billions of dollars for the government and ignorant, racist, America hating republicans vote for him.
ZRT2209
(1,357 posts)Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)Skittles
(153,252 posts)yes INDEED
babylonsister
(171,104 posts)KG
(28,753 posts)rocktivity
(44,583 posts)ESPECIALLY families on welfare? WHY single them out -- simply because they're getting public funds? A lot people's incomes consist of public funds, such as yourself, governor! Don't Florida's taxpayers have the right to be confident that ANYONE who receives taxpayer-funded income is drug-free? Or do you believe it's okay to spend money on illegal drugs as long as you've WORKED for it?
rocktivity
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)perhaps Minnesota should follow Florida's lead
(for my state)
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)tanyev
(42,644 posts)Kennah
(14,349 posts)RKP5637
(67,112 posts)resting on their impaired judgment than a welfare recipient. Politicians and some of their loony decisions cost far more than all of welfare combined.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)including the children. We should have a zero-tolerance policy on his lack of compassion and common sense.
QuestForSense
(653 posts)They are not the majority, but they also share in his hard-headedness. Not the easiest minds to change.
Cha
(297,888 posts)shrunken heart of ol Rick Scott. Doesn't he have shares in a drug testing company?
Kennah
(14,349 posts)He transferred his interest to a trust in his wife's name, and that supposedly has been sold. However, he's clearly shilling for the health industry, so that he's welcomed back with open arms--hopefully after being jailed before the next election.
Best news all year....
BenzoDia
(1,010 posts)This kind of logic makes my head hurt.
KansDem
(28,498 posts)...to have a colonoscopy just to make sure their heads aren't up there...
Bryce Butler
(338 posts)Some common sense on this issue. The only people who benefit from these unconstitutional laws are the owners of the for-profit drug testing industry-- people like Gov. Scott and his wife.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Scott owns a chunk of the company that got paid for the tests. Their assets should be seized, liquidated, and put back into the FL treasury.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Nothing wrong with removing a child's parent/s?
Zero-tolerance--if drug use in the home is itself such a concern, he should be hauling away drunks, too. They really damage the family. Oh..zero tolerance: one beer and it's jail for you, foster care for your kids.
pRick scott doesn't even deserve the honorific, "Mr."
Demeter
(85,373 posts)What's the 4th amendment for, anyway, besides keeping the 3rd from taking the fifth?
mitty14u2
(1,015 posts)The House drug task force that introduced the Barton-Solomon bill also commissioned a report, by attorney Mark deBernardo, which concluded that mandatory drug testing of Representatives is unconstitutional.
The report, Legal Issues Regarding Drug Testing of House Members and Staff, says "If mandatory , suspicionless drug testing of Members of Congress is the inevitable policy of the House, some very good lawyering and very creative legal thinking would be necessary to create even a 20 percent chance of prevailing in court."
The report found that the same constitutional problems would make testing of all Congressional staff difficult, but testing employees in positions that require high security would be more feasible (Francesca Contiguglia, "House Moves Closer to Drug Tests," Roll Call, April 9, 1998, p. 1).
http://www.ndsn.org/mayjun98/capitol2.html
Mandatory drug testing of all members of the U.S. House of Representatives and their staff. "unconstitutional." WTF!
weissmam
(905 posts)that the true benefit of this would be to the drug testing companies since they would get paid for every single test , and the insignificant number of people that tested positive would not come near whatever saving would be realized IF ANY AT ALL
trublu992
(489 posts)I hope Florida can get this jackass out!
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)You were a criminal when you somehow got off after running a Medicare fraud scheme in the sunshine state, and now you think those who you can't bilk for money illegitimately can be milked for money legitimately by trying to pass this law.
Well, you can't.
I look forward to the beginning of this primary season, because you are stinking up the state I lived in for 30 years. I know a lot of people who I left behind there who are going to do everything in their power to boot your sorry ass out of the Tallahassee.
Truly, I wish I could spit on that glossy brainless head of yours at that very moment, you stain.