Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Michigan also has laws against drinking and driving. The Michigan Vehicle Code states that any citizen “whether licensed or not, shall not operate a vehicle upon a highway or other place open to the general public” when they are intoxicated, which is defined as having a blood alcohol content of 0.08% or greater. [4]
In a pilot drug testing program in Florida in 1999-2000, 5.1% returned a positive urinalysis. [24] A 2015 study by ThinkProgress found that out of seven states reporting data on welfare drug testing, only one had a usage rate above 1%. [15]
Here's what's happening: In an effort to keep people alive, the state of Michigan is funneling millions of dollars from settlements with opioid manufacturers and distributors into a strategy ...
Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz , 496 U.S. 444 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the constitutionality of police sobriety checkpoints . The Court held 6-3 that these checkpoints met the Fourth Amendment standard of "reasonable search and seizure."
The AOL.com video experience serves up the best video content from AOL and around the web, curating informative and entertaining snackable videos.
These policies are frequently part of comprehensive "Drug and alcohol" policies, and are particularly common in urban school districts. Aspects of the policies may include random drug testing, searches of lockers and personal effects, anti-drug education (e.g., "Just Say No" curricula), and punitive measures including expulsion and suspension.
Chandler v. Miller, 520 U.S. 305 (1997), was a case before the United States Supreme Court concerning the Constitutionality under the Fourth Amendment of a state statute requiring drug tests of all candidates for certain state offices.
However, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Skinner that random drug testing is permissible for employees in safety sensitive positions. Justice Kennedy, speaking for the majority, wrote: [T]he Government interest in testing without a showing of individualized suspicion is compelling.