Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin Oral Argument
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument on Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, docket number 11-345, a case on a…
Radio: Supreme Court Oral Argument: Maryland v. King
2013-06-07T16:00:00-04:00https://ximage.c-spanvideo.org/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwaWN0dXJlcy5jLXNwYW52aWRlby5vcmciLCJrZXkiOiJkZWZhdWx0c1wvQ2FwaXRvbF9kZWZhdWx0LWltYWdlLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJmaXQiOiJjb3ZlciIsImhlaWdodCI6NTA2fX19Heard by the Court heard on February 26.
At issue: A Maryland law that required routine DNA sample of every person arrested by police for what that law defines as a “serious crime.”
The Court’s 5-4 decision, issued on June 3, ruled that when officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold a suspect for a serious offense and bring him to the station to be detained in custody, that 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.
5pm (ET)
At issue: A Maryland law that required routine DNA sample of every person arrested by police for what that law defines as a “serious crime.”
The Court’s 5-4 decision, issued on June 3, ruled that when officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold a suspect for a serious offense and bring him to the station to be detained in custody, that 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.
5pm (ET)
Heard by the Court heard on February 26. At issue: A Maryland law that required routine DNA sample of every person arrested by police for wh… read more
Heard by the Court heard on February 26.
At issue: A Maryland law that required routine DNA sample of every person arrested by police for what that law defines as a “serious crime.”
The Court’s 5-4 decision, issued on June 3, ruled that when officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold a suspect for a serious offense and bring him to the station to be detained in custody, that 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.
5pm (ET) close
Related Video
-
-
Riley v. California Oral Argument
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case Riley v. California. The plaintiff, David Riley, was convicted on…
-
U.S. v. Wurie Oral Argument
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in U.S. v Wurie. The issue before the court was whether police must obtain a searc…
-
Supreme Court Health Care Law Oral Argument, Day 2
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the second of the four cases challenging the 2010 health care law law. The cas…