Jun 272019
 June 27, 2019  Posted by  Court, Featured News, Surveillance, U.S.

Scott Shackford reports:

The Supreme Court ruled today that exigent circumstances allow police to draw blood from an unconscious driver without his permission and without a warrant if the police suspect that the driver is under the influence of alcohol.

Today’s decision in Mitchell v. Wisconsin comes just three years after the Court ruled that police generally do need to get a warrant to perform blood tests if a driver does not voluntarily consent. And the Court’s judgment actually dodged the major question presented by the case: Whether a state can force a citizen to consent in advance to unwarranted blood tests as a condition of driving.

Read more on Reason.

h/t, Joe Cadillic

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.