Missouri, Petitioner v. G. Mcneely (569 U.S. 141)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided April 17, 2013 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 569 U.S. 141 · 133 S. Ct. 1552
- Decided
- April 17, 2013
- Term
- October Term 2012
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority author
- Justice Sotomayor
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Finally, the State and its amici point to the compelling governmental interest in combating drunk driving and contend that prompt BAC testing, including through blood testing, is vital to pursuit of that interest. They argue that is particularly so because, in addition to laws that make it illegal to operate a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, all 50 States and the District of Columbia have enacted laws that make it per se unlawful to operate a motor vehicle with a BAC of over 0.08 percent. See National Highway Traffic Safety Admin. (NHTSA), Alcohol and Highway Safety: A Review of the State of Knowledge 167 (No. 811374, Mar. 2011) (NHTSA Review). To enforce these provisions, they reasonably assert, accurate BAC evidence is critical. See also post, at 1570 - 1571 (opinion of ROBERTS, C.J.); post, at 1576 - 1577 (opinion of THOMAS, J.). "No one can seriously dispute the magnitude of the drunken driving problem or the States' interest in eradicating it." Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444, 451, 110 S.Ct. 2481, 110 L.Ed.2d 412 (1990). Certainly we do not. While some progress has been made, drunk driving continues to exact a terrible toll on our society. See NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, 2011 Data 1 (No. 811700, Dec. 2012) (reporting that 9,878 people were killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes in 2011, an average of one fatality every 53 minutes).…
Excerpt of a 33,606-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.