In: Psychology
After this decision, student athletes in Washington could no longer be subjected to random drug testing. However, in the neighboring state of Oregon students have no such protection. Under our federal system, how is that possible? Do you think that is a fair result?
Note: This response is in UK English, please paste the response to MS Word and you should be able to spot discrepancies easily. You may elaborate the answer based on personal views or your classwork if necessary.
(Answer) The current system in the United States is one where each state that their own sovereign entity. Under these circumstances, along with the federal law, each state has the authority to construct and implement their own constitutional laws that are based on their individual needs. The fairness of this is subjective because there are some situations that are entirely different in different parts of this vast nation. Certain circumstances are influenced by the different population, climate etc and hence require different laws. However, in terms of universal laws and ethics, every state should have the same basic laws.
That is how Washington and Oregon can have completely different drug testing laws. Random drug testing shares a very fine line with entrapment. Considering that entrapment or setting someone up for a crime that they will later be punished for – is a crime, this might be unfair too.
Several drugs are used medicinally or for viable medical purposes. Under such circumstances, carrying out an investigation or forming a report without considering the justification is close to entrapment. In other words, the individual doesn’t have the change to free themselves of the accusation and might even be cornered into one. This might not be an entirely fair result.