State High Court to Hear Drug-Test Appeal : Athletics: Action sets aside ruling that NCAA program violates right to privacy under California Constitution.

The state Supreme Court agreed today to hear an NCAA appeal to allow drug testing of college athletes in California.

The court’s action sets aside a lower-court ruling, in a suit by Stanford University athletes, that the NCAA drug-testing program violated the right to privacy under the California Constitution.

Chief Justice Malcolm M. Lucas and Justices Edward A. Panelli, David N. Eagleson and Armand Arabian, forming a majority on the seven-member court, voted to grant a hearing on the NCAA’s appeal. No hearing date has been set.

It is also the first private drug-testing case accepted for review by the court, and could determine the scope of the state constitutional guarantee of privacy as it applies to drug testing.

California privacy rights, unlike those recognized under the U.S. Constitution, have been interpreted to protect individuals from intrusions by private as well as governmental entities. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the NCAA is a private organization.

The ruling Sept. 25 by the 6th District Court of Appeal in San Jose was the first by any appellate court in the nation against the drug-testing program. It prohibited involuntary drug testing of Stanford athletes in any competition inside or outside the state.

The state Supreme Court’s ruling will apply to all California college athletes.

The NCAA since 1986 has conducted random drug testing of athletes in championship contests and postseason football games, looking for six categories of drugs, including steroids. To be eligible during the season, all athletes must sign forms consenting to be tested.

Last year, the NCAA began year-round testing of football players for steroids and two other types of drugs.

The appeals court’s 3-0 ruling said the NCAA had failed to show that the testing program was necessary or effective, that there was significant drug use by college athletes or that testing would protect athletes or the integrity of the competition.

The court also said the NCAA had not tried alternatives, such as drug education.

In seeking Supreme Court review, NCAA lawyers said drug education could not assure athletes their competitors were not using drugs.