Supreme Court OKs DNA swab in serious...

Supreme Court OKs DNA swab in serious arrests Supreme Court OKs DNA...

There are 8 comments on the USA Today story from Jun 3, 2013, titled Supreme Court OKs DNA swab in serious arrests Supreme Court OKs DNA.... In it, USA Today reports that:

A narrowly divided Supreme Court ruled Monday that police can collect DNA from people arrested but not yet convicted of serious crimes, a tool that more than half the states already use to crack unsolved crimes.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at USA Today.

sheepleloveroyal ty

Pottstown, PA

#1 Jun 3, 2013
Obama signed into the Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA collection Act in January. The bill is what it is.

http://www.sgvtribune.com/covina/ci_22351451/...

By voting in favor of DNA collection at the time of arrest period the supreme court just backed another Obama agenda. Politics are not out of the supreme court and that includes reactionary politics of politicians using props and exploiting family tragedies for their own agenda.

Since: Aug 10

Buffalo, NY

#2 Jun 3, 2013
sheepleloveroyalty wrote:
Obama signed into the Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA collection Act in January. The bill is what it is.
http://www.sgvtribune.com/covina/ci_22351451/...
By voting in favor of DNA collection at the time of arrest period the supreme court just backed another Obama agenda. Politics are not out of the supreme court and that includes reactionary politics of politicians using props and exploiting family tragedies for their own agenda.
Obama Agenda? When did obama ever call for this?

You freaks blame the weather on obama. The simple fact is that 4 of the 5 votes in favor were conservatives. SCALIA, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined.

Restricting freedom is a conservative Staple. Welcome to the right wing police state!

Dumbass!
sheepleloveroyal ty

Pottstown, PA

#3 Jun 3, 2013
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text> Obama Agenda? When did obama ever call for this?
You freaks blame the weather on obama. The simple fact is that 4 of the 5 votes in favor were conservatives. SCALIA, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined.
Restricting freedom is a conservative Staple. Welcome to the right wing police state!
Dumbass!
Obama called for this when he signed the Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Bill(in link). ENHANCED dna collection... The bill was sponsored by the likes of Chuck Schumer. If the bill or the deal making that accompanied never took place I can't see this decision coming down. The bill and decision were based on reactionary emotionalism especially just a few months after Sandy Hook where a bunch of 'what if' scnerios ' were constantly being talked about.

Conservatives do frequently "appear" to be hardline constitutionalists ie freedom but conservatives also tend to be very pro law enforcement(a combination that I never understood).

This vote as many others are more than likely a vote from backroom horse trading as have many other decisions-'you back me on this vote and back you on another'-it's that simple.

You don't get to be on the supreme court without politics or politicians which means deals, favors and posers seeking those positions.

Since: Aug 10

Buffalo, NY

#4 Jun 3, 2013
sheepleloveroyalty wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama called for this when he signed the Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Bill(in link). ENHANCED dna collection... The bill was sponsored by the likes of Chuck Schumer. If the bill or the deal making that accompanied never took place I can't see this decision coming down. The bill and decision were based on reactionary emotionalism especially just a few months after Sandy Hook where a bunch of 'what if' scnerios ' were constantly being talked about.
Conservatives do frequently "appear" to be hardline constitutionalists ie freedom but conservatives also tend to be very pro law enforcement(a combination that I never understood).
This vote as many others are more than likely a vote from backroom horse trading as have many other decisions-'you back me on this vote and back you on another'-it's that simple.
You don't get to be on the supreme court without politics or politicians which means deals, favors and posers seeking those positions.
It must be so easy for you when you can ignore the facts you dont like.

4 of 5 justice in the majority were conservative
3 of 4 justices in dissnting opinion were liberals

Making up fake deals so you can ignor the facts is simply cowardice! Facts are facts!

Honesty is not that difficult you know!

Also, the VAST MAJORITY of repubs voted for this act as well, so it seems it was pretty well agreed upon by both sides

We agree that this ruling is bad. However blaming it on Obama is simply partisan weakness!

Sponsors were
Lance Winslow

San Jose, CA

#5 Jun 3, 2013
sheepleloveroyalty wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama called for this when he signed the Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Bill(in link). ENHANCED dna collection... The bill was sponsored by the likes of Chuck Schumer. If the bill or the deal making that accompanied never took place I can't see this decision coming down. The bill and decision were based on reactionary emotionalism especially just a few months after Sandy Hook where a bunch of 'what if' scnerios ' were constantly being talked about.
Conservatives do frequently "appear" to be hardline constitutionalists ie freedom but conservatives also tend to be very pro law enforcement(a combination that I never understood).
This vote as many others are more than likely a vote from backroom horse trading as have many other decisions-'you back me on this vote and back you on another'-it's that simple.
You don't get to be on the supreme court without politics or politicians which means deals, favors and posers seeking those positions.
Sure is a whole lot of whining coming down in this forum since Romney lost. Before that, sure was a lot of arrogance and confidence in the GOP agenda. It appears this will be a trend all the while the economy improves.

“Yeah, but...”

Since: Sep 11

MILKY WAY

#6 Jun 3, 2013
But They'll make an exception for Michael Douglas!
sheepleloveroyal ty

Pottstown, PA

#7 Jun 3, 2013
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>It must be so easy for you when you can ignore the facts you dont like.
4 of 5 justice in the majority were conservative
3 of 4 justices in dissnting opinion were liberals
Making up fake deals so you can ignor the facts is simply cowardice! Facts are facts!
Honesty is not that difficult you know!
Also, the VAST MAJORITY of repubs voted for this act as well, so it seems it was pretty well agreed upon by both sides
We agree that this ruling is bad. However blaming it on Obama is simply partisan weakness!
Sponsors were


By Obama signing off on a bill like this he, the face of the Democratic party and left wing agenda is approving of what should be constitutional violations. The bill was introduced by a Democrat and advocated by prominent Democrats. True RepubliCANTs enabled this but if this bill was not introduced, approved and/or signed off on(2 of 3 to the Dems) the law/procedure would've probably been struck down due to different political winds.
sheepleloveroyal ty

Pottstown, PA

#8 Jun 3, 2013
Should note that Obama advocated a national DNA database or registery back in 2010, three years ago giving the plenty of time for the politicos including the supreme court to come up with a bill and agenda for this issue.

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0310/...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Stephen Breyer Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Supreme Court sympathetic to Microsoft in Xbox ... Mar 22 anonymous 1
News Cheerleaders, chambermaids: The Supreme Court's... Mar 21 anonymous 1
News Supreme Court hears cases about use of race in ... Dec '16 Eleanor 21
News Supreme Court to hear case of transgender bathr... Nov '16 RustyS 34
News Unusual start to Supreme Court's new term: No a... Oct '16 barefoot2626 23
News School board, sued by transgender student, asks... (Aug '16) Sep '16 Mr Coach 55
News Voting Rights on the March (Aug '16) Aug '16 storm warning 1
More from around the web