A number of legal issues are involved in conducting a drug testing program to determine whether students--and occasionally teachers--are using illegal drugs. Two legal issues have been raised concerning the accuracy of the urinalysis test: whether it is chemically accurate and whether appropriate procedures have been followed to make certain that the tests apply to the right specimen. In "Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers v. Board of Education," the New York State Court of Appeals struck down a program of blanket testing for all probationary teachers as a condition of obtaining tenure and held that the appropriate standard to apply to the testing of an individual was that of "reasonable suspicion." A New Jersey state court held that school authorities must meet the test of reasonable suspicion for the individual students tested and struck down the contemplated mass screening program of all students. The mass testing of student athletes has not been addressed by a court of record. Among the conclusions and recommendations provided for school administrators are the following: (1) mass, or even random, urinalysis testing programs are very questionable for both teachers and students; (2) individual testing must be carried out under very strict procedures; and (3) justification for disciplinary action, even with positive tests, is questionable. Appended are 16 footnotes. (MLF)