Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.
- Decided
- March 21, 1989
- Docket
- 87-1555
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 2,560 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that federal regulations requiring employees of private railroads to provide urine samples for drug testing are subject to Fourth Amendment strictures — Peggy Poe v. John Leonard, Defendant-Third Party-Plaintiff-Appellant, Douglas Pearl, State of Connecticut, Third-Party-Defendant (2002)
- holding that drug and alcohol testing of railroad employees is governed by the Fourth Amendment — United States v. Donald P. Rohrig (1996)
- holding that blood tests, breathalyzer tests, and the taking of urine samples constitute searches under the Fourth Amendment — Kohler v. Englade (2006)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*606] Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court.
The Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970 authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to “prescribe, as necessary, appropriate rules, regulations, orders, and standards for all areas of railroad safety.” 84 Stat. 971, 45 U. S. C. § 431(a). Finding that alcohol and drug abuse by railroad employees poses a serious threat to safety, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has promulgated regulations that mandate blood and urine tests of employees who are involved in certain train accidents. The FRA also has adopted regulations that do not require, but do authorize, railroads to administer breath and urine tests to employees who violate certain safety rules. The question presented by this case is whether these regulations violate the Fourth Amendment.
I
Statutes cited
Cite this
Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn., 489 U.S. 602 (1989)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.