Home
Subscribe (free)
About NaturalNews
Contact Us
Write for NaturalNews
Media Info
Advertising Info
DNA database

Supreme Court rules in favor of national DNA database, allowing police to forcibly seize DNA without a warrant

Tuesday, June 11, 2013 by: Lance Johnson
Tags: DNA database, Maryland v. King, Fourth Amendment

Most Viewed Articles
Popular on Facebook
http://www.naturalnews.com/052405_Chipotle_ecoli_outbreak_corporate_sabotage_biotech_bioterrorism.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/052837_Chipotle_E_coli_investigation_corporate_sabotage.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/052180_San_Bernardino_shooting_ISIS_terrorism_government_operation.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/052508_Oregon_patriots_armed_revolution_Civil_War_in_America.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/052179_global_warming_science_fraud_globalist_control_agenda.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/052824_Zika_virus_genetically_engineered_mosquitoes_unintended_consequences.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/053651_Robert_De_Niro_vaccine_debate_VAXXED_documentary.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/052245_flu_shot_complete_idiot_immune_system.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/052196_active_shooter_drills_San_Bernardino_shooting_Inland_Regional_Center.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/053469_vaccines_autism_FDA_documents.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/040723_DNA_database_Maryland_v_King_Fourth_Amendment.html
Delicious
diaspora
Print
Email
Share
(NaturalNews) The supreme law of the United States has just voted 5-4 in favor of a National DNA database. In Maryland v. King, the court upheld the right of police to arrest and forcibly take DNA samples from individuals, without even issuing a search warrant.

Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy stated, "Taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee's DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment."

Speaking on the behalf of the four dissenting judges, Justice Scalia objected, "Make no mistake about it: As an entirely predictable consequence of today's decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national DNA database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason."

Scalia continued, "The Fourth Amendment forbids searching a person for evidence of a crime when there is no basis for believing the person is guilty of the crime or is in possession of incriminating evidence," Scalia wrote. "That prohibition is categorical and without exception; it lies at the very heart of the Fourth Amendment.

What some liberty-minded congressmen are saying

In his floor speech responding to the ruling, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) expressed strong opposition, and was loud and clear, voicing his continued support for individual liberties and upholding the Fourth Amendment.

Senator Ted Cruz denounced the Supreme Court ruling and stated, "Today's unfortunate U.S. Supreme Court ruling expands government power, invades our liberty, and undermines our constitutional rights."

DNA intrusion and database "for our safety"

The case, Maryland v. King, No. 12-207, originated in 2009 when police collected DNA from Alonzo Jay King Jr. after he was arrested on assault charges in Maryland. After swabbing his cheek, police used the evidence to match DNA of an unsolved rape case.

As the Supreme Court majority goes on to believe that their judgment will help law enforcement solve more crimes like this in the future, it is important to be skeptical, questioning the future implications that will come, as Fourth Amendment rights are forfeited.

• Will airports begin employing this "security routine?" The TSA would love to use this new ruling to their advantage. Body scans, pat downs, and ...routine DNA swabs!

• In order to get a driver's license, will everyone need to be DNA swabbed, as their biometric footprint is recorded and stored?

• Will school children need their irises scanned and their DNA collected to ensure future "safety?" This is already happening in places in the country.

• Will a National ID card be mandated for all US workers, requiring a mass DNA collection from all? A proposed law just like this has been discussed in Congress this year.

The Supreme Court must have amnesia. Remember what the Constitution says?

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

These Justices need held accountable for turning their back on the Fourth Amendment: Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr, Anthony M. Kennedy, Justices Clarence Thomas, Stephen G. Breyer and Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.cato.org/blog/maryland-v-king-surveillance-state

http://www.campaignforliberty.org

http://www.nytimes.com

About the author:
Lance Johnson is a passionate researcher, learner, writer, and healer. Lance and his wife invite you to check out their line of clean and conscious body care products at www.allnaturalfreespirit.com.


Join the Health Ranger's FREE email newsletter
Get breaking news alerts on GMOs, fluoride, superfoods, natural cures and more...
Your privacy is protected. Unsubscribe at any time. | Learn more...
comments powered by Disqus
Support NaturalNews Sponsors:
Support NaturalNews Sponsors:
GET SHOW DETAILS
+ a FREE GIFT