http://writ.news.findlaw.com/colb/20041117.html At the end of last month, in the case of Coddington v. Evanko, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that police officers may constitutionally shave large amounts of hair from a suspect's head, neck, and shoulders, without a warrant, probable cause, or any basis for suspecting that the hair would provide evidence of crime. The Fourth Amendment guarantees the people the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. But according to the court, the Fourth Amendment does not apply to hair removal. In so ruling, the Third Circuit followed its own 1982 precedent, In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Appeal of Mills), which held that taking hair samples from visible parts of a suspect's body does not invade any reasonable expectation of privacy. Such investigation therefore does not qualify as a Fourth Amendment "search." makes me mad. drug test needs 30-40 hairs, not your "fleece" discuss
That is completely ridonkulous! It doesn't surprise me one little bit after watching that Bohemian Grove tape.. *Sigh* But as long as people allow those who are loaded with mental problems to lead them, no one will have rights to anything..
Why are my tax dollars being spent for this intrusion? How much does a hair test cost me? If these folks have nothing better to do with thier time, I think that budget and staffing cuts are appropriate. These buracracies must be awash in money to finance these fishing expeditions! I wonder what would happen if this case goes to The Supreme Court?