Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Evidence Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Enforcement and Corrections

PDF

University of Washington School of Law

2019

Articles 1 - 1 of 1

Full-Text Articles in Evidence

Save Your Breath: A Constitutional Analysis Of The Criminal Penalties For Refusing Breathalyzer Tests In The Wake Of Birchfield V. North Dakota, Kylie Fisher Jan 2019

Save Your Breath: A Constitutional Analysis Of The Criminal Penalties For Refusing Breathalyzer Tests In The Wake Of Birchfield V. North Dakota, Kylie Fisher

Washington Law Review Online

Statutes that criminally penalize suspected drunk drivers who refuse to submit to testing of their blood alcohol concentration emerged in a number of states as a way to better enforce implied consent statutes that require drivers submit to such testing. In Birchfield v. North Dakota, the Supreme Court held that statutes that criminally punish individuals for refusing a blood test were unconstitutional but upheld criminal refusal statutes regarding breath tests. Much of the reasoning in the majority’s opinion stemmed from a shallow perception of the invasion that breath tests pose to individual privacy interests. Justice Sotomayor’s dissenting opinion noted …