However, the court awarded the city an unbridled right to require urine samples from employees suspected of drug use on- or off-duty. In holding that a reasonable suspicion of illegal drug use was a sufficient cause to require drug testing, the court joined a growing trend among other State and Federal courts. A review of case law indicates that the courts are eroding piecemeal fourth amendment protections. In addition, a number of employers, especially in Federal Government, are adopting antidrug policies; and medical screening in the workplace is rapidly escalating. Thus, the fourth amendment has retained little of its ability to protect the human body from governmental intrusion. According to Bauman and similar decisions, prohibitions apply only against unprovoked random urine testing -- privacy rights are unprotected when there is reasonable suspicion of drug abuse both in the workplace and in private, off-duty life. 202 footnotes.