
“For the privilege to apply, however, the government must try to compel a person to make a ‘testimonial’ statement that would tend to incriminate him or her. When a person has a valid privilege against self-incrimination, nobody — not even a judge — can force the witness to give that information to the government. But a communication is ‘testimonial’ only when it reveals the contents of your mind. We can’t invoke the privilege against self-incrimination to prevent the government from collecting biometrics like fingerprints, DNA samples, or voice exemplars. Why? Because the courts have decided that this evidence doesn’t reveal anything you know. It’s not testimonial.”
Related posts:
JPMorgan To Exit Foodstamp, Other Prepaid Cards Business
Legal loophole allows new belt-fed AR-15 that sprays bullets
Rasmussen Poll: Nullification Goes Mainstream
Was World War 2 a "good war?"
Man Arrested for Video Recording Military Exercise from City-Owned Parking Lot
Thailand Bitcoin issues - Not exactly true
Dzhokar Tsarnaev’s Throat Wound: Another Government Lie Bites the Dust
15 Houses in Detroit You Can Buy for Less Than $500
Government Alienates Americans Abroad By Criminalizing the Innocent?
Charlie Shrem, Bitcoin entrepreneur, interviewed by Jeffrey Tucker
Los Angeles sheriff gives comedian award for racially-motivated routine
US advisers urge Trump to refinance US debt by issuing 100-year bonds
Twitter IPO filing prompts mistaken buying rush of worthless TWTRQ stock
Pennsylvanians Coerced To Give Cheek Swabs at 'Voluntary' Checkpoint
At Least 46 Killed in Two Days of US Drone Strikes in Yemen