California and the Fourth Amendment
By Editorial,
The New York Times
| 09. 18. 2012
On Wednesday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is scheduled to reconsider whether California violates the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against searches and seizures by requiring police to take DNA samples from people arrested but not yet convicted of felonies. California’s law is ostensibly aimed at accurately identifying those arrested, solving crimes and exonerating the innocent. It is also, unfortunately, unconstitutional.
An appeals court panel ruled otherwise in February. In a 2-to-1 vote, it said the law was reasonable, a view with prominent support. In July, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. wrote that there was “a reasonable probability” that the Supreme Court would address the issue this term in a Maryland case and that there was “a fair prospect” that it would rule as the appeals court panel had in the California case. This is a matter of national import because the federal government and more than half the states have laws allowing DNA sampling before conviction.
The constitutional outcome should be clear. Unless there is a warrant, or suspicion of a different crime that a DNA...
Related Articles
By Caroline Kitchener, The New York Times | 05.24.2026
More than anything else in the world, Erin Millender longed to be a mother. She already had a day care picked out, a Pack ’n Play stashed in her basement. She’d tried Chinese pregnancy teas and midnight fertility ceremonies under...
By Calder Mchugh, Politico | 05.15.2026
There will come a time, in the not-so-distant future, when you decide to stick a computer chip in your brain.
At least, that’s what D. Scott Phoenix told the audience at TED 2026 in Vancouver last month.
“Someone you work...
By Nanette Elster, Kayhan Parsi, and Art Caplan, The American Journal of Bioethics | 05.06.2026
“Better babies.” “Fitter families.” “Survival of the fittest.” “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” These phrases are not merely historical reminders of the United States’ regrettable eugenic past but are appearing in an increasingly eugenic present. Eugenics may have seemed...
By Alex Aylward, Daniel J. Fairbanks, Maria Kiladi, and Gregory Radick , Heredity | 04.20.2026
Genetics and eugenics co-evolved at the beginning of the twentieth century and remained associated through the 1940s and beyond. Early geneticists were far from unanimous in their views on eugenics; some avidly supported the movement, whereas others openly opposed it...