3 ms·
Your statement on the 5th amendment is no longer accurate broadly, but the matter still has some cross-jurisdictional disagreement: https://americanlegalnews.co
by vorpalhex 5y ago
Your statement on the 5th amendment is no longer accurate broadly, but the matter still has some cross-jurisdictional disagreement: https://americanlegalnews.com/biometrics-covered-by-fifth-amendment-judge-rules/ https://americanlegalnews.com/biometrics-covered-by-fifth-am...
- torstenvl 5y agoDistrict courts don't make law. Magistrates working for those district courts even less so. The case this news article cites has no precedential value anywhere - not even within N.D.Cal. - and should not be relied upon. IAAL but IANYL
- kingcharles 5y agoAgreed. That decision is unlikely to be repeated by any appellate court. IMO, all the rulings on biometrics not being testimonial are constitutionally correct, even if that sucks. A lot of constitutional rulings suck. The real solution is for a federal statute to require warrants.