Fordham Law Review Volume 75 Issue 3 Article 26 2006 Last Resort: The Threat of Federal Steroid Legislation--Is the Proposed Legislation Constitutional? Joshua Peck Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Joshua Peck, Last Resort: The Threat of Federal Steroid Legislation--Is the Proposed Legislation Constitutional?, 75 Fordham L. Rev. 1777 (2006). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol75/iss3/26 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. Last Resort: The Threat of Federal Steroid Legislation--Is the Proposed Legislation Constitutional? Cover Page Footnote J.D. Candidate, 2007, Fordham University School of Law. I would like to thank Professor John D. Feerick, Jeffrey L. Kessler, and Courtney Domercq for their insight and guidance. This article is available in Fordham Law Review: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol75/iss3/26 NOTES LAST RESORT: THE THREAT OF FEDERAL STEROID LEGISLATION-IS THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION CONSTITUTIONAL? Joshua Peck* INTRODUCTION On January 20, 2004, President George W. Bush, in his State of the Union Address, highlighted the growing problem of steroids in professional sports. 1 President Bush cited the importance of athletics in our society and focused on the fact that professional athletes are role models for America's children. 2 He stated that the use of performance-enhancing drugs by professional athletes has been sending the wrong message to the nation's 3 youth.