The Supreme Court today sharply limited the Government's ability to drug mentally ill defendants in order to render them competent to stand trial.

The Justices imposed conditions that the Government must meet before resorting to drugging defendants:

Justice Stephen Breyer, writing for the majority, said the government must show that involuntary medications ``will significantly further'' the goal of bringing the case to trial. And courts, in considering individual cases, must consider ``alternative, less intrusive treatments'' of defendants, he wrote.

The case required the court for the first time to balance the government's interest in punishing nonviolent crime with a person's constitutional right to control his or her body. Justices said that the Constitution allows the government to administer drugs ``in limited circumstances.''

Currently, the Government drugs hundreds of defendants every year to make them stand trial.

Breyer said forced medications may be permitted only rarely. Some groups had called on the court to use the case to ban forced medication outright. ``Hopefully, courts will use this test carefully to protect against coercive drugging,'' said Judith Appel, an attorney with the Drug Policy Alliance, which contends that people -- not government -- should decide what drugs they take.

The federal government puts hundreds of defendants on medication each year to make them competent to stand trial. Most take the drugs willingly. In a recent 12-month period, 59 people were medicated against their wishes and about three-fourths were restored to competency, the government has said.