A suspect may be innocent until proven guilty, but any suspect arrested for a serious crime in California can be swabbed for a DNA sample.

Today, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a provision of California’s DNA and Forensic Identification Data Base and Data Bank Act (DNA Act), which requires law enforcement officers to collect DNA samples from all adults arrested for felonies. California law enforcers have identified more than 10,000 offenders by using their DNA, reports The Wall Street Journal.

Balancing the arrestees’ privacy interests against the Government’s need for the DNA samples, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the DNA Act does not violate the Fourth Amendment because the Government’s compelling interests outweigh arrestees’ privacy concerns.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge William Fletcher argued that the DNA samples were used for investigative purposes, and should not be collected without a warrant or reasonable suspicion. He also observed that the expungement process for suspects not charged with felonies is a “lengthy, uncertain, and expensive” process.

The Ninth Circuit majority asserted that sampling under the DNA Act is substantially similar to fingerprinting, which law enforcement officials have used for decades – without serious constitutional objection – to identify arrestees. Do you agree, or do you think DNA sampling is more intrusive than fingerprinting? More importantly, is this an issue that the Supreme Court would be willing to hear?

Related Resources:

  • Haskell v. Harris (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
  • DNA Collection of Criminal Suspects: 3rd Cir. OKs Arrest DNA Check (FindLaw’s Decided)
  • Cal Appeals Court Overturns DNA Collection (FindLaw’s California Case Law blog)

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Civil Rights

Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court

Criminal

Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records

Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules