By Byrne Fahey and Pia Chakravarty
”Just state your name and address,” repeated each Princeton High School administrator on the evening of May 24. Roughly 400 students lined up to speak into passive alcohol sensors at the door of prom. Thanks in part to the Board of Education’s recent implementation of policy 5335, which gave the school permission to breathalyze students at the dance, the prom was both successful and sober.
For all but two students, that is.
Two seniors, Kevin Petrovic and Sasha Chhabra, didn’t even make it into the lobby. When asked to speak their names into the sensor, both students, both sober, refused on the grounds that the breathalyzer policy is unconstitutional.
”We did what we did because civil liberties and our constitutional rights are the most basic protections, they must be defended on all fronts,” said Chhabra.
According to Petrovic, they “felt it was important for the administration to at least see there are students who strongly disagree with the policy.”
Both students were simply barred entry to the dance.
”The policy specifically had a plan laid out for students who rejected the test, including mandatory professional testing, which was said verbally to an assembly of students as well. The administration did not follow their own policy when [we] refused,” said Petrovic. The boys expected to be escorted to further testing, including costly medical tests. “I do not want to speculate whether they did so because they realized it would cost them $3,000, or because it would be of questionable legality, or because they simply didn’t want to deal with it,” said Petrovic.
Chhabra and Petrovic researched similar situations that were later resolved in the U.S. Supreme Court or New Jersey courts. They also referred to the Constitution prior to refusing the test. However, the students have not yet announced any concrete plans to address the issue further.
”At this point we have not officially disclosed any plans for any legal action nor have we notified the school of anything along those lines,” said Petrovic.
”However, we plan on not only resolving our own situation, but working to ensure future classes are protected,” said Chhabra.
The students are grabbing the attention of more than just the administration, even doing a live interview on CNN Headline News.
”We are trying to raise additional awareness of the policy and our action in the community,” said Petrovic.
”We have received nearly overwhelming support,” said Chhabra. “I feel this is because [students] know it is for their rights we are fighting, while we were the only ones to assert them.”
Not all students, however, are particularly supportive of Chhabra and Petrovic.
”It seems like they’re just being difficult and trying to make a mountain out of a molehill, just because the school is looking out for the students’ safety,” said Lauren Ullmann, a junior.
”They’re trying too hard to make a statement when there’s no statement to be made,” said Tess Stairiker, a senior. “It’s not [a violation of their rights] because it’s optional. You weren’t forced to go to prom.”
Other students not only deny that the breathalyzer test was unjust, but also plainly disagree with Petrovic and Chhabra’s claims regarding the policy’s constitutionality.
Ashley Vanname, a senior said, “We had a prom meeting, they clearly outlined everything for us. If you’re going to a school function, it’s the school’s choice [to breathalyze]. They’re not forcing you to go or taking away your liberties.”
One thing many students can agree on, though, is that alcohol abuse is certainly a problem worth avoiding and worth addressing.
”It is a serious issue; one that kills many people each year. There are ways to alleviate that issue, but this absurd policy is not one of them,” said Petrovic.
Ullmann saw the situation differently.
”I think the school made a good decision in at least saying that there [were] going to be breathalyzers because at the end of the day, they just want kids to have a fun and safe experience that they will remember, that they will be able to appreciate and enjoy,” she said.
Some students agree that the policy is unconstitutional, but also deem it necessary.
Dan Hardaker, a senior, said, “I can see how it’s a violation of our rights but everyone knows that they’re doing it for our own safety, because if something happens then it’s on their heads so it’s really just another safety precaution.”
However, Petrovic and Chhabra are standing their ground.
”While we certainly recognize that there is an alcohol problem,” said Chhabra, “there are ways of countering it that make the evening safe for our constitutional rights, as well as our bodies.”
”Who would want to be treated as guilty until proven innocent?” asked Petrovic. “Who believes that they should lose their fundamental rights when they are at a school or school event? It’s common sense.”
Byrne Fahey is a junior and Pia Chakravarty is a senior at Princeton High School.

