A Question of Consent. (1991) Journal of Sport Management, 5(1), 83. The article reports that drug testing of intercollegiate athletes is a timely and controversial topic. Most legal discussions of this topic focus on the possible constitutional violations inherent in such a plan. But Purnell analyzes the issue of consent within the framework of contract and tort law. It can be argued that there is a contractual link between the student-athlete and the university.
A “Vital” Dispute. (1992). Journal of Sport Management, 6(2), 159. The article provides a short synopsis of various court challenges to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) drug testing program that tests at all championship events and randomly tests Division 1 football players in the off-season. Under a Fourth Amendment analysis, there basic issues need to be considered. Urinalysis is considered a search for Fourth Amendment analysis.
Buti, T., & Fridman, S. (1990). Drug testing in sport: Legal challenges & issues. University of Queensland Law Journal, 20(2), 153-185. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/215225238?accountid=12085 Buti and Fridman set out the legal framework within which alleged sports doping offenses are to be adjudicated. The major legal challenges likely to be mounted by suspended athletes are discussed.
Carlisle, N. (2007, Nov 18). Athletes give views on doping. The Salt Lake Tribune, pp. n/a.
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/282095766?accountid=12085 The NCAA selects athletes for random steroid testing at events such as its championship track meet, but when LSU tests its athletes it sometimes screens for performance enhancers and sometime just for street drugs such as marijuana and cocaine. Drug testing. (1994). ABA Journal, 80, 77-77. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/194374362?accountid=12085 The Colorado Supreme Court has ruled in University of Colorado...