Zero Tolerance

[Page 869]Zero tolerance is an approach to regulating behavior in which every infraction of specified rules is punished without regard to extenuating circumstances and without granting discretion to those in authority to overlook or mitigate the specified punishment for an infraction. The idea behind zero tolerance is that clear and consistently enforced rules will encourage people to avoid breaking rules while a policy or practice of overlooking small infractions encourages people to commit larger crimes because they take it as an indication of license to misbehave. Zero tolerance policies also may be instituted in order to prevent discrimination (so that some people get away with violations while others are punished) and to protect those who must carry out the sanctions from blame since a zero tolerance policy requires that every violation be addressed. In addition, with respect to behaviors such as drug use, a zero tolerance policy can be used to provide early intervention to the violator and perhaps keep them from becoming addicted or moving on to more serious drugs while also removing them from a context (such as a school or workplace) where they may encourage others to take up the prohibited behavior.

In general zero tolerance programs are more likely to be successful when the rules are specific and sanctions are mild and less likely to succeed when sanctions are severe and rules are overly broad (for instance, automatic school suspension for possession of aspirin). However, drug and alcohol monitoring programs appear to be an exception. For instance, the Hawaii Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) program requires participants (who are on probation for serious crimes or drug problems) to undergo random drug testing for up to six years, with immediate short-term jail stays for noncompliance. Similar programs have been used successfully to monitor physicians with substance abuse problems and persons convicted of driving while intoxicated. Notably, all these programs included support and treatment features as well as monitoring and sanctions.

The idea of zero tolerance has been traced back to the 1970s and has been applied in many contexts, including drug use, fraud, vandalism and graffiti tagging, bullying, and sexual harassment. The idea has become popular politically as a means of portraying an individual as, for instance, “tough on drugs” and both more idealistic and morally righteous than others with a less absolutist stance. In addition, zero tolerance policies are frequently portrayed as more effective than more nuanced or subjective means of dealing with undesirable behaviors such as prevention, harm reduction, [Page 870]or simply allowing authorities to judge each case individually.

Zero tolerance policies have been particularly popular when imposed on young people and students, perhaps because as minors they are expected to meet standards of behavior imposed by adult authorities. In the case of students, such policies have been justified on the grounds that the school is acting in loco parentis (“in the places of a parent”) and thus actions such as searching student lockers for contraband have been justified as being in the best interest of the students. Courts have also recognized the need for school administrators to exercise authority over students and the school environment because they are responsible for ensuring safety. Many U.S. schools have a zero tolerance drug policy and some states have motor vehicle laws that impose more severe restrictions on young drivers (for instance, no level of alcohol is permissible for drivers under age 21) than on adults.

...