Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
For example, in Railway Executives, the need to discover the cause of railway accidents justified the drug testing, and in Acton it was the need to promote a drug-free school environment. In this case, however, the very reason for the policy was to use the threat of arrest to motivate the women to abstain from using cocaine.
The FRA also adopted regulations that authorized railroads to administer breath and urine drug tests to employees who violated safety rules. The Railway Labor Executives' Association , an umbrella group of railway trade unions , sued to have the regulations declared an unconstitutional violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States ...
Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995), was a U.S. Supreme Court decision which upheld the constitutionality of random drug testing regimen implemented by the local public schools in Vernonia, Oregon. Under that regimen, student-athletes were required to submit to random drug testing before being allowed to participate in ...
The drugmaker has settled a series of lawsuits related to Zantac over the past 12 months, including several in California. California is generally seen as a more challenging legal environment for ...
A new law requiring many California bars and nightclubs to offer common date-rape drug test kits will take effect Tuesday, according to the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.
California sued the Ralphs supermarket chain on Thursday, alleging that it violated state law by asking job-seekers whether they had criminal records and illegally rejecting hundreds of applicants.
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, 582 U.S. ___ (2017), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that California courts lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant on claims brought by plaintiffs who are not California residents and did not suffer their alleged injury in California. [1]
Board of Education v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822 (2002), was a case by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 5–4, that it does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution for public schools to conduct mandatory drug testing on students participating in extracurricular activities.