Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

Supreme Court Upholds DNA Swabs

The highest court in the country rules that it’s constitutional for law enforcement to take a DNA swab from people under arrest. South Dakota authorities do that as part of the booking procedure for serious crimes.

At issue in front of the U.S. Supreme court is whether it’s an illegal search for law enforcement to take DNA samples after arresting people for serious crimes. South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley joined as a friend of the court on behalf of the state. He says South Dakota authorities do take samples after people are arrested but before they’re tried and sentenced. He says the DNA database has assisted in 260 investigations since 2005.

"So, when you weigh the interests of justice to solve perhaps take a sex offender off the streets or a murderer to protect the public, versus taking a cheek swab with the protection that the legislature has given, that we felt that was a reasonable search under the circumstances," Jackley says.

The court agrees with Jackley. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of swabbing for DNA on a 5-4 decision.

South Dakota is one of 26 states that allows law enforcement to take a cheek swab from people arrested for dangerous crimes.  Jackley says state law limits how officials use that genetic information once it’s stored in a database.

"And then, when there’s a serious crime that occurs, and we’ve seen it here in South Dakota, the Minnesota case as well as the Mellette burglary, when we don’t know who might be responsible, but we have some physical evidence, we have some DNA evidence that we can take and look for a match. And, when we discover that match, we’re able to then, through further investigation, solve the crime. We’re able to narrow the search for suspects for a particular crime," Jackley says.

Jackley says South Dakota’s database has 45,000 samples. The attorney general says law enforcement use the database not just to point to suspects, but to eliminate people who didn’t commit crimes. The attorney general says there is a process for removing a person’s sample from the database under certain circumstances.

Kealey Bultena grew up in South Dakota, where her grandparents took advantage of the state’s agriculture at nap time, tricking her into car rides to “go see cows.” Rarely did she stay awake long enough to see the livestock, but now she writes stories about the animals – and the legislature and education and much more. Kealey worked in television for four years while attending the University of South Dakota. She started interning with South Dakota Public Broadcasting in September 2010 and accepted a position with television in 2011. Now Kealey is the radio news producer stationed in Sioux Falls. As a multi-media journalist, Kealey prides herself on the diversity of the stories she tells and the impact her work has on people across the state. Kealey is always searching for new ideas. Let her know of a great story! Find her on Facebook and twitter (@KealeySDPB).