Homepage of the Drug War Philosopher, Brian Quass
blog icon orange rss icon with stylized radio waves bird icon for twitter bird icon for twitter substack icon


back navigation arrow forward navigation arrow


When Employers Say Piss, Americans ask 'How much?'

How Drug Testing Trashed the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

by Brian Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher

November 8, 2025



Americans roll over and play dead when it comes to drug testing. Not that I can blame them, of course. Drug warriors have blackmailed them into compliance by denying them the right to work in America should they stand up for their Fourth Amendment rights. That said, however, I am disheartened by the lack of pushback against this flagrant violation of American freedoms. Drug testing gives employers the right to trample the Bill of Rights, and most Americans take this in stride.


Ad for Schedule 1 Laundry Detergent 'for those special moments', bottle on top left. In center, young proud father fixing tie on his preteen son, with the caption 'It's his very first drug test!'
Schedule 1 Laundry Detergent -- because it's not enough to pass your drug test anymore, you need to pass it with flying colors!




It's a good job that I am a senior citizen, because I would starve if I were starting out now. I would never urinate for an employer in order to satisfy his or her morbid curiosity about the plant medicines of which I might choose to partake. The only drug test with which I would comply would be one that was limited by law to flagging impairment only. I would literally rather be poor than to give up my right as an American citizen to my freedom from unreasonable search -- and nothing could be more unreasonable than a biochemical fishing expedition inside my very body, as undertaken by a private enterprise, no less!

I think everyone who urinates under such conditions should have the right to see a breakdown of the biochemistry of their employer's urine -- as well as that of the lab techs who are testing the applicant samples, in blithe ignorance of the fact that they are thereby trashing the most basic of American freedoms -- the right to privacy, not just in one's home, for God's sake, but inside one's very body! Drug testing of this kind screams out the words "Unreasonable Search" -- and our courts' failure to recognize this fact shows how far the right wing has taken over American government. These courts do not even seem to know what the word "principle" means.

These are the courts that say, in regard to peyote use, that we do not have a right to religious liberty if we are practicing a religion that was not practiced by our ancestors! See? These guys are just making it up as they go along. They simply use their creative writing skills to invent literally unheard-of "rationales" for ruling against drug use: the more arbitrary the better, because they thereby signal to Americans that the right-wing is in control and doing as it pleases. "Principles?" they cry. "We don't need no stinkin' principles"!


American flag propped up by beaker containing yellow urine. To the right, the words: America, where a man is judged not by the color of his skin, but by the content of his urine.
Drug testing is the extra-judicial enforcement of Christian Science sharia, designed to remove Christian Science heretics from the workforce.




Unfortunately, our thoroughly cowed population seems to agree, otherwise there would be organized pushback against drug testing.

Occasionally, I overhear a conversation that sounds hopeful. Some friends and family members are actually discussing drug testing. But then I realize that their concern is limited to their fear that the ingestion of poppy seeds, as for instance from crackers, might return a false positive for opiate use in some upcoming test. That is a merely selfish concern. Their real concern should be that they are being tested in the first place. (I want to tell them: "That's not YOUR problem! Sue the ---- if they deny you work because you eat crackers! They have no business making hiring decisions based on equivocal data like that!")

But let me do my best to see this from the Drug Warrior's point of view. Let's suppose then that safety does indeed make it necessary for private enterprise to trash our Fourth Amendment rights. Okay. Let's assume that the Founding Fathers really didn't mean it when it came to the Bill of Rights. Fine.

In that case, let us begin searching for alcohol in our tests, a drug which kills 178,000 Americans a year, far more than are killed by so-called "drugs." 1 If we find so much as a trace of liquor, let us deny the culprit the ability to work in America. Indeed, let's really crack down, because we need to be SAFE, don't we?! We owe this to our KIDS!! Let us confiscate mansions and estates whenever so much as a beer bottle is found on the premises -- and who cares where it came from! (Don't you hate these topers that hide behind technicalities! Well, no more!) Instead of throwing mothers out of public housing for using a drug that Freud considered to be a godsend for depression, let us start throwing CEOs out of boardrooms if they test positive for having consumed deadly alcohol -- now or at any time in the past, it does not matter when! We're doing this for our children, remember? Tough love, folks! Tough love! 2

But somehow I fear that our Drug Warriors are not quite THAT interested in safety. They are thinking of policies that would serve to rough up their political opposition, not policies whose consequences would hit home for them personally.

And so I conclude as follows:

Until acne-scarred lab techs start testing the urine of Drug Warriors for liquor consumption (that may have taken place at any time in the past, I don't care when), I'll keep my zipper up, thank you very much. And that goes for you Lowe's... and you, Amazon... and you, Costco, etc.

Someday a free people are going to rise up and shame such drug-testing companies for helping to trash the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

RELATED ESSAYS










Notes for essay entitled When Employers Say Piss, Americans ask 'How much?': How Drug Testing Trashed the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

1: CDC. 2024. “Facts About U.S. Deaths from Excessive Alcohol Use.” Alcohol Use. July 8, 2024. https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/facts-stats/?CDC_AAref_Val=https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/features/excessive-alcohol-deaths.html. (up)
2: Drug Warriors and Their Prey: From Police Power to Police State Miller, Richard Lawrence, Bloomsbury Academic, New York, 1996 (up)




read more essays here





Ten Tweets

against the hateful war on US




There are endless creative ways to ward off addictions if all psychoactive medicines were at our disposal. The use of the drugs synthesized by Alexander Shulgin could combat the psychological downsides of withdrawal by providing strategic "as-needed" relief.

Orchestras will eventually use psychedelics to train conductors. When the successful candidate directs mood-fests like Mahler's 2nd, THEY will be the stars, channeling every known -- and some unknown -- human emotions. Think Simon Rattle on... well, on psychedelics.

The Cabinet of Caligari ('62) ends with a shameless display of psychiatric triumphalism. Happy shock therapy patients waltz freely about a mansion in which the "sick" protagonist has just been "cured" by tranquilizers and psychoanalysis. Did Robert Bloch believe his own script?

In his treatise on laws, Cicero reported that the psychedelic-fueled Eleusinian Mysteries gave the participants "not only the art of living agreeably, but of dying with a better hope."

"Like Christians burning mosques and temples to spread the word of Jesus, modem drugabuseologists burn crops to spread the use of alcohol." -- Ceremonial Chemistry, p. 48

Pundits tell us that there are medical reasons not to "snort" cocaine. So what? There are medical reasons not to drive a car: you may have an accident. The question is: does cocaine use or car driving make sense in a given case! Details matter!

As great as it is, "Synthetic Panics" by Philip Jenkins was only tolerated by academia because it did not mention drugs in the title and it contains no explicit opinions about drugs. As a result, many drug law reformers still don't know the book exists.

I'm told that science is completely unbiased today. I guess I'll have to go back and reassess my doubts about Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.

In "Psychedelic Refugee," Rosemary Leary writes: "Fueled by small doses of LSD, almost everything was amusing or weird." -- Rosemary Leary In a non-brainwashed world, such testimony would suggest obvious ways to help the depressed.

The problem for alcoholics is that alcohol decreases rationality in proportion as it provides the desired self-transcendence. Outlawed drugs can provide self-transcendence with INCREASED rationality and be far more likely to keep the problem drinker off booze than abstinence.


Click here to see All Tweets against the hateful War on Us






back navigation arrow forward navigation arrow
Book Cover

Break the ice with a sledgehammer: place this book on your coffee table.

This book features 150 annotated images, designed to force brainwashed Americans to confront the fact that drug prohibition is wrong. Here is what author Richard Parrish II says of the book's compiler: "The drug prohibition philosopher provides first-hand, principled, persuasive, and insightful arguments against the current drug prohibition regime..."

Purchase Your Copy
Book Cover

Diary of a Drug Fiend

This is the only full-cast recording of Aleister Crowley's 1922 classic paeon to common sense. It is the first book -- and so far almost the only book -- to stake out a philosophy of drug use that is compatible with human freedom, one in which we learn to use drugs as wisely as possible for the benefit of humanity. This recording was produced by the Drug War Philosopher and your purchases help support his effort to push back against the tragically counterproductive policy of drug prohibition, in the name of human freedom and of humanity's right to heal.

Purchase Your Copy



No cookies, no ads paid for by amoral and immoral billionaires (or trillionaires).


Unless otherwise indicated, no AI is used in the creation of site content. These essays represent the original ideas of their author and not the ideas that the author SHOULD have based on an algorithmic parsing of existing data. For more on this subject, consider the AI-related viewpoints to which the author subscribes as delineated in the New York Times opinion piece entitled "What 370,000 College Essays Tell Us About A.I.’s Effects on Creativity" by Rebecca Winthrop of the Brookings Institution.

The Partnership for a Death Free America is a proud sponsor of The Drug War Philosopher website @ abolishthedea.com.


Copyright 2026, Brian Ballard Quass Contact: quass@quass.com

tombstone for American Democracy, 1776-2024, RIP (up)