SUPREME COURT: POLICE MUST HAVE WARRANTS FOR BLOOD ALCOHOL TESTS ON SUSPECTED DUI DRIVERS

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version Share this

 

By Miriam Raftery

June 27, 2016 (Washington D.C.) — Suspected drunk drivers can refuse to take a blood test without a warrant, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday. But the Court also held that drivers must submit to a less invasive breath test when ordered, or face arrest.

Five justices side with the majority:  Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan. 

Two others, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, believed warrants should be required for both blood and breath tests.  Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas contended that police should not need warrants for either test.

Law enforcement had argued that delays in getting warrants could enable some drunk drivers to get off the hook, since blood alcohol content diminishes over time.


Error message

Local news in the public interest is more important now than ever, during the COVID-19 crisis. Our reporters, as essential workers, are dedicated to keeping you informed, even though we’ve had to cancel fundraising events. Please give the gift of community journalism by donating at https://www.eastcountymedia.org/donate.