Justices Look At Legality Of Drunken-Driving Test

[Wizard777]

Justices Look at Legality of Drunken-Driving Test

WASHINGTON — Prosecutors in Missouri, supported by the federal government, came to the Supreme Court on Wednesday with a big request: They wanted the justices to rule that the police do not need warrants to obtain blood samples in drunken-driving investigations.

There seemed little enthusiasm among the justices for that categorical approach. Instead, the argument turned into a search for a middle ground that would take account of the practical realities of roadside stops, body chemistry and the administration of justice in the digital age.

On the one hand, the natural dissipation of blood alcohol means that time is of the essence when people suspected of drunken driving are pulled over and refuse to consent to a breath test. Obtaining a warrant, moreover, takes time.

[Wizard777]

I think it's good that SCOTUS is considering this light of the digital age. There are things like the Carrol doctrine that needs to be reconsidered in that light. I think technology is sufficeint to allow every search and seizure to be done with a warrant as the founders intended. But what remains to be seen is if they will force states to use the technology.