This all may be true. That does not provide any insight into the constitutionality of the "prison or military" program though. I think in a court of law, the unequivocal conclusion that a judge would come to is it is a direct violation of the 13th Amendment. I see an argument for both sides but if you look at the actual language of the provision it is very specific.

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

And if it is the punishment for crime that is one thing. But when you look at it in context you see that involuntary servitude is a person, for instance placed in the military against their will "under some form of coercion," according to Wikipedia.

So I think based on that alone it should be unconstitutional but of course the liberals will find all kinds of arguments around it.

And back to what we were discussing earlier as far as mandatory drug testing goes... I would imagine the burden would still rest on law enforcement's shoulders to find probable cause to even take a piss sample. I don't see any reason why unlawful search and seizure should apply only to homes and cars when the authorities are violating basic constitutional rights to find whatever reason to place you under arrest.

It makes no sense. I have used drugs. I would not want the government coming in and forcing me to take a drug test. It is not right. I don't see why we're even arguing it other than some idiot making the statement that prison is a legitimate punishment for a casual drug offense.