Justice Scalia Calls DNA Swab a Gateway to Police State

 Justice Scalia says DNA swabs pave the way to a "police state"
Justice Scalia says DNA swabs pave the way to a "police state"
Image: Shutterstock

While the Supreme Court has a fairly clear divide on who is liberal and who is not, the last year has shown that dissent from political ideals not only happens, but is in fact fairly common.  This was the case with Justice Scalia’s nearly always-conservative vote against the legalization of DNA checks during police book procedures.  Scalia, who has previously been on record as a defender of citizen privacy, called the 5-4 decision to allow states to pass DNA identification systems as an abuse of power, paving the way to a “police state” that would allow law enforcement to arrest citizens for minor offenses if they are suspected in other more serious crimes. 

  The plaintiff in the case, Alonzo King, filed a complaint against the state of Maine for a violation of his fourth amendment rights that bar officials from unreasonable search and seizure.  King had been arrested for assault and police took a DNA swab from his cheek.  The DNA sample was run through a data base and was matched to a rape case from six years prior, and King was convicted of the rape shortly after.  Later, a court threw out his conviction, claiming that police do not have the right to use DNA databases to “fish” for other criminal activity just because someone is arrested. 

Justice Scalia and three other traditionally liberal Justices (Kagan, Sotomayor and Ginsburg) agreed with the appeals court, insisting that DNA is private property and that the long procedure for collecting and processing DNA means it is not crucial to identifying a suspect the way fingerprinting is.  However, the other five Justices used fingerprinting to defend DNA identification and the law in Maine and thirty other states was upheld.  Scalia wrote in his dissent paper that swabbing for DNA is primarily used to find evidence for crimes other than what the suspect is being processed for, and equated to searching homes of suspects on a hunch that they might have done something wrong.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post