Circuit Court Critical of California DNA-Gathering Law
Allows police to demand samples of anybody arrested for a felony
An en banc panel of the 9th Circuit criticized a California law that allows police officers to collect DNA samples from anyone arrested for a felony.
Their comments contrast wildly with the opinion reached by a three-judge panel in February that allowed the statute to go forward.
"DNA is much more severe an intrusion than a fingerprint," said Judge Harry Pregerson, who seemed particularly disturbed by the law.
A class of sampling subjects sued the state in 2009, claiming the collection of DNA samples constituted an illegal seizure of their genetic information and violated their due-process rights. Lead plaintiff Elizabeth Haskell was arrested in March 2009 at a peace rally for allegedly obstructing an officer. She claims police told her she would be charged with a separate misdemeanor when she refused to let authorities swab the inside of her cheek, the typical method officers use to collect DNA.
Hide Comments (0)
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?