The Supreme Court had a 5-4 ruling on Thursday, issuing the decision that will allow police officers across the nation to require drivers to take a breath test without refusal, and require officers to provide a warrant for blood testing.
Before this ruling, there were 13 states that legally charged drivers with a separate crime if they refused the blood test, but this ruling makes it to where police cannot charge for refusal if a warrant is not obtained.
In Texas, the law currently allows for drivers to refuse both breathalyzer and blood tests. Lubbock’s Lt. Ray Mendoza says that consent is the key when administering both breathalyzer or the blood test.
“We try to do is first get consent and so if we’re asking for a specimen of the breath, then that’s got to be a consent, there’s no way we can force someone to blow into the breathalyzer.” said Mendoza.
Mendoza says that although the breathalyzer cannot be forced, taking blood technically can as long as a warrant is retrieved.
“But, if we’re going to draw blood, we ask for consent and then the person can either consent to getting their blood drawn or they can refuse, and if they refuse, then we get a warrant for the blood.” said Mendoza.
Local DWI Attorney, Stephen Hamilton says he is interested to see how local police handle this ruling, since an actual law change has not technically occurred, the ruling is left under police digression.
“I think certainly we are going to see some legislature propose a law, next session right, that will make it illegal, so a criminal offense, to refuse to give a breath sample.” said Hamilton.
The court ruled that since breath tests are not as intrusive as a blood sample, drivers do not have the right to refuse them.
