Oct 252013
 October 25, 2013  Posted by  Court, U.S.

Orin Kerr writes:

The forthcoming Supreme Court issue of the Harvard Law Review will feature an essay by NYU Law professor Erin Murphy on the Supreme Court’s recent Fourth Amendment case on DNA searches, Maryland v. King. Professor Murphy’s essay, License, Registration, Cheek Swab: DNA Testing and the Divided Court, argues that King is likely to have an unexpectedly large impact on the future of Fourth Amendment law.

In Murphy’s view, King is significant less for what it said than for what it didn’t say. Presented with the major implications of DNA analysis in the parties’ briefs and the amicus briefs, the Court didn’t address them. Instead, Justice Kennedy issued a majority opinion that seemed unconcerned with those implications.

Read more on The Volokh Conspiracy.

Correction: a previous version of this post misidentified the source of the post as Concurring Opinions. It was published on The Volokh Conspiracy. Both are excellent blogs, but that’s no excuse for my brain fade. My apologies.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.