Police Commissioners Advised Against Random Drug Testing of LAPD Officers

The Los Angeles city attorney’s office advised the Police Commission on Tuesday that Police Chief Daryl F. Gates’ proposal to implement mandatory random drug testing of officers could be struck down as unconstitutional.

Deputy City Atty. Les E. Brown told commission members that Gates’ plan could be construed as a reversal of the basic tenet of American law, which presumes a person innocent until proven guilty.

Gates’ drug-testing proposal, “in effect, presumes guilt of the many and in the process identifies few guilty persons,” Brown said. “The trend (in the courts) appears that random drug testing cannot be sustained in the context which you’ve presented.”

Several lower-level state and federal courts already have held that such testing is an invasion of privacy and violates constitutional protections against unwarranted search and seizure, Brown said.

Program Struck Down

A U.S. district court in July struck down a testing program in Plainfield, N.J., where all firefighters and police officers had been obligated to undergo urinalysis. The court held that unless the city had a “reasonable suspicion” in individual cases, it could not impose blanket testing without violating the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment.

In another case in July, a state court tossed out a New York City Police Department policy in which officers newly assigned to the organized crime unit had to submit to drug tests as a condition of employment.

California courts have yet to address the issue of mandatory drug testing, Brown said.

Gates has proposed that the serial numbers of each of the Los Angeles’ 7,000 police officers be fed into a computer and that the computer provide a daily list of randomly selected names. Those officers would then be required to undergo urinalysis or face possible insubordination charges.

The department’s existing policy allows for testing of individual officers suspected of using narcotics. Tests have been administered on three officers so far this year, two of whom were found to have used illegal drugs, according to department spokesman Cmdr. William Booth. Of the two officers who tested positive, one resigned and the other was fired.

Six other officers have refused department demands this year to be tested, Booth said. He said he did not know what specific penalties they face.

Gates, who was hospitalized last week with pneumonia, was not present at Tuesday’s commission meeting. However, the department’s No. 2 man, Assistant Chief Robert L. Vernon, said department administrators are convinced that present allowances for testing are not sufficient, given that officers are often called upon to make life-or-death decisions.

“It’s possible for someone to come in to roll call today and be under the influence of drugs and no one even know about it,” Vernon said. “We don’t want even one L.A. police officer to be under the influence of drugs at a time when these kinds of decisions are made.”

Commission members took no formal action Tuesday on the issue of drug testing, and board President Robert M. Talcott said he does not believe that drug abuse is “a problem” within the department.

Commission Vice President Barbara M. Schlei, meanwhile, proposed that the city attorney’s office study the feasibility of implementing mandatory drug testing in instances in which officers are involved in shootings, traffic accidents and use of excessive force.

She also proposed that more police officers be trained to detect symptoms of drug use among fellow officers.