The Office of Legal Affairs, in conjunction with nearly two dozen medical and public health organizations submitted an amicus ("Friend of the Court") brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in support of plaintiffs in Ferguson v. The City of Charleston.

A public hospital in Charleston South Carolina initiated a policy of selectively drug testing women who came in for prenatal care or delivery without their knowledge and then turning women over to the police following a positive drug test. Many of these women were subsequently prosecuted and incarcerated for child abuse for the alleged harm that the drug use caused to the fetus. Ten women who were drug tested sued the hospital and the state. In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the women, holding that the drug tests were an unconstitutional search because the hospital was acting as an arm of law enforcement without first obtaining a search warrant or informed consent before conducting the drug tests. DPA submitted an amicus (friend-of-the-court) brief in the Supreme Court, which they cited in their decision.

The Supreme Court remanded the case to the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in order for them to determine whether or not the plaintiffs gave informed consent to the hospital to drug test them.  In October, 2002, the Fourth Circuit held that all but two of the Ferguson plaintiffs did not provide informed consent to the taking and testing of their urine by the Medical University of South Carolina, resulting in a violation of their Fourth Amendment rights.  With respect to the two remaining plaintiffs, the Court determined that one did provide an adequate consent and that more evidence was needed in the final case.  More recently, the City of Charleston unsuccessfully attempted  to have the full Fourth Circuit reconsider and reverse this ruling. Drug Policy Alliance submitted an amicus brief to the Fourth Circuit on behalf of prominent national bioethicists and medical and public health organizations arguing that the Medical University of South Carolina violated the core doctrines of informed consent and medical confidentiality which are essential to providing effective health care.

The City appealed its loss to the United States Supreme Court, but in June 2002, the Supreme Court declined to rehear the case.  This denial clears the way for a trial on damages -- finally giving the individual plaintiffs their day in court. The refusal to review the 4th Circuit opinion also leaves standing an important ruling regarding patient privacy and the integrity of the health care patient-provider relationship.