Assume that you are the law clerk for a judge, and that the following case is before her. Your court is the Confusion Court of Appeals, which is located in the state of Confusion, our 51st state.

Minor v. Happyville School Board, Docket number 01-2378

Mary Minor is 17 years old and attends Totalitarian High School (THS), located in the town of Happyville, in the state of Confusion. THSis a public school, and has a total of 1000 students in grades 9 through 12.

In early 2000, the Happyville School Board and the THS Principal became concerned that some students at THS were using drugs. They felt that this was interfering with those students' ability to learn, and also serving as a bad example for other students. In Fall of 2000, THS implemented a random drug testing policy. Under this policy, the names of all the THS students were put in a computer database. Each week, a computer program randomly selected 20 names from the database. Those students whose names were selected were required to report to the locker room. In the locker room, they were given a urine collection cup and told to go into a bathroom stall and urinate into the cup. A teacher of the same sex stood outside the bathroom stall to supervise. The cups were sent to a lab for drug testing. If a sample tested positive for the presence of drugs, the student and his or her parent were notified immediately. They were then given the opportunity to provide documentation that the student had a prescription for the drugs. If no such documentation was provided, the student was immediately expelled.

By Fall 2001, approximately 800 drug tests had been completed at THS. Of these, 80 showed the presence of drugs, but in 70 of those cases, the students showed that they had prescriptions for the drugs. In the remaining 10 cases, the students were expelled.

In September 2001, Mary was notified that her name had been randomly chosen for the drug test. She reported to the locker room, but, once there, refused to give a urine sample. She was sent to the Principal's office, where she again stated her refusal. The Principal sent her home, and, several days later an expulsion hearing was held. At the hearing, Mary said that she was a good student who planned to graduate the following spring and attend college. She said that she did not use drugs, but that she refused the test because she felt it was an invasion of her privacy. At the end of the hearing, mary was expelled. She was told that she could not return to THS until she agreed to a dug test. Because Mary's family cannot aford to send her to private school, this would mean that she would be unable to obtain her high school diploma.

Mary and her parents subsequently filed suit in Confusion Superior Court, claiming that the chool's drug testing policy violated her 4th amendment rights. The court found in favor of the school board, and Mary now appeals.
 

PART ONE: Answer the following questions.
1. What words can be used to describe the parties, places, and things involved in this case?
2. What words could be used to describe the legal issues in this case?
3. What research leads are there?
PART TWO:
Assume that the judge has requested that you write a legal memorandum concerning this case. Describe in detail (and in order) exactly what steps you would take to research this case.
PART THREE:
Find one real case that you would consult when researching these issues. Give the citation for this case. Also, read the case carefully and brief it as you would for research. Hand in a copy of that brief.
HINT:
You will really be writing a memo for the case of Minor v. Happyville School Board for your next assignment. Putting a lot of careful thought into assignment 4 will make assignment 5 much easier!