Follow CBSMIAMI.COM:Facebook|Twitter

TALLAHASSEE (CBSMiami/ NSF) A federal appeals court on Wednesday, again rejected a Florida law requiring welfare applicants to submit to drug tests before they can receive benefits.

Pushed by Florida Governor Rick Scott, the 2011 law offends the Fourth Amendment protections from unreasonable searches by the government, a three-judge panel ruled in a 54-page opinion authored by Judge Stanley Marcus.

We respect the states overarching and laudable desire to promote work, protect families, and conserve resources. But, above all else, we must enforce the Constitution and the limits it places on government. If we are to give meaning to the Fourth Amendments prohibition on blanket government searches, we must and we do hold that (the Florida law) crosses the constitutional line, Marcus wrote.

The ruling, which upheld a final judgment late last year by U.S. District Judge Mary Scriven, is the fourth time courts have sided with the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida and the Florida Justice Institute, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of Luis Lebron, a Navy veteran and single father. The lawsuit was filed shortly after the law went into effect in mid-2011. Scott used mandatory drug tests as an issue in his 2010 campaign.

This is a resounding affirmation of the values that the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects that none of us can be forced to submit to invasive and humiliating searches at the whim of the government, and that the Constitution protects the poor and the wealthy alike. The court has once again confirmed what we argued all along: that the state of Florida cannot treat an entire class of people like suspected criminals simply because theyve asked the state for temporary assistance, ACLU of Florida associate legal director Maria Kayanan, who argued the case before the court Nov. 20, said in a statement.

Scott can either ask the 11th Circuit for an en banc review by the entire court or pursue an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court. The Scott administration did not comment Wednesday afternoon on the ruling. Despite repeated court decisions finding that the welfare drug testing law is unconstitutional, Scott and his lawyers have refused to back down from their position that the urine tests are needed to make sure poor children dont grow up in drug-riddled households.

But the appeals-court judges again rejected the Scott administrations arguments, saying that the state failed to make its case.

In effect from July 1, 2011, until Oct. 24, 2011, when Scriven issued a preliminary injunction putting it on hold, the law required applicants seeking benefits in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program emergency cash benefits for the poorest of the poor, available to expectant mothers and families with children to submit to and pay for urine tests, which range from $24 to $45. The money would be reimbursed if the tests were negative, and parents who failed the tests could designate someone else to receive cash benefits on behalf of their children.

During the period in which the law was in effect, 4,406 applicants submitted to drug testing. Only 108 less than 3 percent tested positive for drugs. Another 2,306 applicants failed to complete the applications or receive the drug screens.

See more here:

Appeals Court: Welfare Drug Tests Unconstitutional