SCOTUS react: Mitchell vs Wisconsin

Question: Does a statute that authorizes a blood draw from an unconscious motorist provide an exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement?

----

[applecorc]

Interesting video. I'm in Wisconsin and was a juror last year on a DWI case where the defendant refused to do field sobriety, breath, and blood tests. We found him not guilty, mainly because no officer ever saw him inside a vehicle, let alone in the driver seat of one.

[Carahan]

Sounds to me like in general most of the justices didn't like either argument very much.

[ICountFrom]

(12:23) so you can't give up your first amendment right, but you can automatically agree, in advance, to give up your fourth? Why is that the line? What if it was your second amendment? (32:14) hrm... intersting answer, guess it would be out of the scope of the discussion to take a look at the entire constution for rights you could, and couldn't contract out of...

[seagravity]

isnt implied consent more like a contract? i agree that you can do A or B. but its a choice given to me without an actual choice given at time of signing.


and doesnt the scotus opinion tie together the hospital and law enforcement as a single body.