A federal judge has upheld the constitutionality of a federal law that denies financial aid to students with drug convictions.
In dismissing a lawsuit filed by Students for Sensible Drug Policy and other organizations, U.S. District Court Judge Charles B. Kornmann at least temporarily ended the legal battle over the law. Critics say the provision has cost 200,000 needy students access to financial aid programs — including many students of color — while supporters say federal education funding should not go to lawbreakers.
The law denies aid for one year to students convicted of a drug offense. A second conviction means two years without aid, and a third conviction makes the ban permanent.
Before the U.S. Congress passed the law, judges could choose to revoke student aid as part of sentencing but rarely did so.
SSDP had filed suit last March claiming the provision violates the constitution’s equal protection clause by singling out drug offenders while those with more serious convictions — including rape and murder — can still receive financial aid. The group also claimed the rule violates the constitution’s ban on double jeopardy by punishing students a second time following their drug conviction.
Kornmann rejected those claims in deciding the case, Students for Sensible Drug Policy Foundation v. Spellings. He concluded that there is no double jeopardy since students eventually can regain eligibility for aid, he said, and the equal protection clause — often cited in cases of racial bias — does not apply.
Kornmann acknowledged that students convicted of possessing a small amount of marijuana may lose all aid while those found guilty of violent crimes still may receive federal help.
