As I Predicted, U. S. Supreme Court Rules Law Enforcement MUST Obtain A Warrant Before Drawing Blood Sample From A Driver Suspected Of Driving Drunk.
Check out the case here.
As an avowed Liberty Lover, I greatly applaud the near unanimous opinion of the court. as wise Justice Sonya Sotomayer told it:
"But the fact that people are “accorded less privacy in . . . automobiles because of th[e] compelling governmental need for regulation,” California v. Carney, 471 U. S. 386, 392 (1985), does not diminish a motorist’s privacy interest in preventing an agent of the government from piercing
his skin".
Concluding she states: "We hold that in drunk-driving investigations, the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream does not con-stitute an exigency in every case sufficient to justify
Yes, indeed!
As an avowed Liberty Lover, I greatly applaud the near unanimous opinion of the court. as wise Justice Sonya Sotomayer told it:
"But the fact that people are “accorded less privacy in . . . automobiles because of th[e] compelling governmental need for regulation,” California v. Carney, 471 U. S. 386, 392 (1985), does not diminish a motorist’s privacy interest in preventing an agent of the government from piercing
his skin".
Concluding she states: "We hold that in drunk-driving investigations, the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream does not con-stitute an exigency in every case sufficient to justify
conducting a blood test without a warrant."
Yes, indeed!
Labels: Constitutional Rights, The Constitution, U. S. Supreme Court
posted by KYJurisDoctor at 6:28 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home