@@werefrogofassyria6609 Actually, you can sue for being arrested under false pretenses. There's your damages. They don't even need to take your DNA - though they probably did when they arrested you, leading to the lawsuit anyway.
It will law and enforceable until and unless its declared unconstitutional. For all t hose caught up in the quagmire in the mean time, the damage will already be done. They're not likely to destroy those sample they already have unless ordered to. And even then, its unlikely they will actually do so.
@@werefrogofassyria6609 That's not true, especially for situations involving constitutional rights. Standing can be established before actual damages if it can be shown you are likely to have damages and have sound legal theory as to why it is unlawful.
I don't think it matters if you sent it in anymore. They caught the Golden State Killer because a relative of his sent in their own DNA. I suppose it sounds good. They caught a serial killer. But that's the logic they use to make it mandatory for everybody.
They are too busy revisiting old 1930-1950 civil right cases.... The most Authoritarian Court in the history of the United States is not going to outlaw this.
My [typo edit] brother was a business owner in Alaska, and he left the state because of that law. And I will NEVER give a single cent to Alaska, and as long as this law remains, I will badmouth the state to every person who mentions Alaska.
@@Andrewflusche The problem is every state does stupid stuff in different areas. There's no escaping government overreach unless we do what the founders did...
@@Andrewflusche hello.my grandson got a speeding ticket by a county sheriff.he told my grandson.he could leave the car and they would tow it.or he could drive away and get a ticket.he didn't have insurance.he drove away and got ticketed.now they want to take finger prints for a dam speeding ticket ????. He was out working doing grub hub.when he got caught please help.any good lawyers near Dearborn michigan you know of.
@@brentiers it's why (i fully believe) they want gun control. disarm the country (in the name of freedom and safety, while the authorities get all the weaponries they desire) and then you have a good old fashioned police state....Russia 2.0.
@@Andrewflusche Most recent googling gives a rough estimate that we've reached 60% of Americans living paycheck to paycheck. Most of the country literally cannot afford to move to another state. If a state law is federally illegal, we need a fed that takes action to enforce that, period. The president at the time had to send the army just to enforce black kids going to desegregated schools. Very strange to hear a lawyer be out of touch like that. "Dead letter law", and all that. Laws that are not enforced, effectively don't exist. You talk about similar things all the time on this channel from the angle of freedoms. If you cannot open carry in the "legal" place without the police stopping you, do you really have that right? If the fed doesn't protect you from an extensive state system of overreach, you have lost those rights in the same way. This is a clear case where we need the fed to slap this shit down, and quickly.
Does this require a search warrant? Do you have time to talk to an attorney? This seems like a really big deal for police to be able to just walk up to you and say, "Hand it over immediately or you're going to prison."
It doesn’t matter. The fourth amendment of the Constitution is quite clear and the state can make up any law they want but that does not help the constitution of the United States people will physically resist and you’re not gonna start cataloging us like animals.
@@ProfessorJayTee Yep. Slowly but surely, the USA is becoming the USSR. We're not that far from it! A couple more disasters (warranting increased government interference, of course) and the USA is a police state.
Well, I guess Alaska is off my list of places to move to in order to escape the crazy people. I guess the insane cold and sessmic activity wasnt enough for the alaskan state government to keep people from living there.
Happened to me there and charges were completely dropped. Not guilty of anything but they treat you like you are there. Why I won’t go back even though I love the state.
Just got pulled over in PA the other day after leaving work for apparently NOT turning on my headlights in a timely manner after leaving the parking lot at Dusk. Mind you I had my Parking & Fog lights on , But any how I apparently was " Required " to provide PROOF of where I was coming from . I Had to actually Show my Work Schedule & Time clock Punch out time , Other wise I was going to be forced into DUI Testing because it was almost 9pm at night on the Sunday of a Holiday Weekend... So much for being the " Land Of the FREE " , The Old USA seems to be Lost ...
Should have let them arrest you. You don't have to tell them where you were, where you are going, who you where with. Of course you can tell them going home after being with his wife/boyfriend 💕!
Yes. I don't know if any have retroactively expanded the reach of DNA collection quite like this. But Virginia definitely collects DNA for a wide variety of *misdemeanors*. Thankfully we only collect for *convictions* at least.
The more I hear about 'the law' the more I am disgusted by it. And more so by the endless stream of 'just doing my jobbers' that line up to enforce the bs.
I refused this same request and they threatened to take me into custody and get a warrant to “forcibly” take my blood. I had two attorneys involved and they both ultimately advised me to consent if I didn’t want to be arrested and strapped down in a chair for the procedure.
Why isn't your DNA protected by the 4th amendment from such an intrusive seizure without due process and a specific court order in relation to a specific crime? This is like a giant drag net where you don't know the sample won't be misused by the state. I'd refuse and have to challenge it too on principle.
likely because SCOTOUS has ruled biometric data is not protected information, this is also why you can be compelled to provide a finger print or retenia scan to unlock encrpyted devices, but can make a claim with a pin code to not do so. The courts decided your biometric data which includes DNA is not private.
I really want to see a video discussing the 'legality' of 'legally detained' versus 'arrested'...because police will place a subject in handcuffs 'for their protection', then proceed to question them...and if they refuse, they are told 'then you will be arrested'...so, you have NO 4th or 5th Amendment rights UNLESS you refuse to talk to them while detained, which then has you arrested (something will be trumped up later)...which is EXACTLY what the 4th Amendment was designed to prevent (unlawful detention or interference with regular citizen movement)...why has this not gone to the Supreme Court?
It's becoming increasingly apparent, that "laws" are becoming excuses to police every person at all times. At this rate, you'll need to file papers with the court to go take a piss in your own house.
I live in Anchorage Alaska. Yesterday I was pulled over for expired tags. The officer wanted a DNA sample from me as well as finger prints. I got a felony conviction in 2012 for growing Marijuana about a year before it was legalized. A dna sample was taken from me in the courtroom apon conviction. Yet the officer is threatening me with a c felony for refusing to provide a sample. He was harassing me about not wanting to give him my address. I'm not on probation and I am not a sex offender so I do not have to notify them of my residence. WTF did I wake up in nazi Germany or am I still in America? I decided to investigate the matter online and found your video. Any recommendations from an actual attorney would be greatly appreciated and seriously considered.
Since corporations were ruled "people" does that mean shop lifting from a corporation is a "crime against a person" in Alaska but shoplifting from a small "Mom and Pa" store isn't?
Yes after and only after a conviction should a person's DNA be collected and entered into the system. Just being charged should NOT be a reason to collect DNA, total violation of people's rights.
"I guess the Alaskan authorities can try and harvest their DNA from mail in ballots" in reference to dead people... lol 🤣🤣 I love your channel Andrew! All that you do to inform us is much appreciated.
So if the constitution forbids and ex-post facto law; then that law is repugnant to the constitution! So what happened to “ a law that is repugnant to the constitution is void”? Alaska just gets to do it anyway and the citizens have to follow an unconstitutional law? Not to mention that Alaska is using an ex-post facto law as a means to perpetuate a writ/ bill of attainder which is also forbidden by the constitution!
They get away with it until somebody who can afford good lawyers challenges it and hopes it reaches a high enough court to render it unconstitutional. Meanwhile, the damage has been done.
So even worse. In your example, you could have to give your DNA just for being at a sports bar where a fight broke out because someone said they saw you push someone even though you just sat there quietly drinking your beer.
I was leaving Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana a few years ago. I am a retired reservist. I was stopped by the Air Force Security and "asked" to submit to a vehicle search that included sniffer dogs. I was in a bit of a hurry and listened to enough videos like yours to know that you never agree to a search. I was told that I could lose my retired military privileges to come on the base if I did not agree to the search. I realize that military bases have different rules concerning the Fourth Amendment rights. I had given no "probable cause" and had no contraband. I was just vehicle number whatever and was selected out for an outbound search. Finally, they did an abbreviated search and let me go on my way.
There are usually signs at the entry point that state, "authorized entry into this restricted area constitutes consent to search of personnel and property under their control."
Yup. $2million in legal fees and 8 years later, you might get in front of a hostile judge to plead you case, just before you get slapped down by the judge.
With regards to your view of collecting DNA from those convicted of "serious or violent" offenses - isn't that nothing more than collecting evidence from people based on the presumption that they will commit another crime in the future? Thus, a "presumption of guilt" and not a "presumption of innocence". Isn't that also a violation of their 5th and 4th amendment protections: providing information that can be used against themselves, and warrantless seizures?
We may see changes with a SCOTUS ruling about passcodes to phones, but in general DNA is treated just like fingerprints and treated as physical evidence that can be collected rather than speech/testimony that requires you to do something. There's obviously a great argument that automatically collecting DNA for any arrest in which there's no crime scene DNA they're trying to math is a search that should require a warrant (for which there wouldn't be probable cause since there's no DNA to match with), but good luck with that. The current court is happy to rule against the government in a lot of things, but police action against individuals isn't one of them.
@@suedenim9208 Very well-said! All we can do is hope that it will be fair-minded, and very smart, people deciding what's just. See Timmie - your vote does matter.
At trial: You are innocent until proven guilty. BUT : From being accused until you are at trial you are guilty while the police and prosecutors dig for evidence.
Seen the footage last month. The cop was in error. Or rather the court order is in error. They ALREADY HAVE his DNA on file. The warrant is void. The damage done.
What I am struggling to understand is how, after being adjudicated as "not guilty", the Alaskan government thinks they can *take anything at all* from someone without due process? Also, why didn't you show what happened after he told the cop "no"?
They do it all the time. Your online stuff they get not with warrants, but the buy it from brokers. Simple. Your DNA they may get from doctors or labs now. Everyone makes you sign wavers to private info. Goes to insurance companies to pay claims, but do you trust insurance companies not to sell or share with brokers or agents of other companies?? Do you feel lucky?
Andrew, you left a few questions unanswered: Has the ex post facto aspect of this law been litigated? What was the result? And while you said that Ed can't be arrested on felony charges for refusing to provide a DNA sample, does that mean he can he be arrested on a misdemeanor charge instead? If so, that still puts a high price on his refusal.
Collecting DNA without conviction is common - Under California law, law enforcement in California is required to collect DNA samples from anyone arrested on suspicion of a felony crime. California maintains a DNA database for felons and individuals arrested for felony offenses.
Alaska the Last Frontier of USA. Is the pilot test State for the rest of the States. Many times when things are implemented they are usually tested in lesser known/uncommon places before it is fully implemented everywhere.
Don't really subscribe to you tube channels but after watching a couple of yours the entertainment value and legal knowledge is something nobody should miss.
Wouldn't retroactive seizures of DNA be considered unreasonable under the 4th amendment, due to the fact that the individual is already determined not guilty and due to the invasiveness of the seizure?
@@silverdeals243 naturally, but I was thinking you would comply, making it clear you are acting under threat of arrest, and then take legal action after
Conviction or acquittal is irrelevant. As I see it, what matters is that when a past case is done any effort to collect DNA is a new and separate search and therefore has to meet the requirements of the 4th amendment.
Hi Andrew, last week I observed a NYC cop pull over a vehicle and after the car pulled to the curb, the cop (over his megaphone) shouted to the driver “lower ALL of your windows!” Meaning all four front and back windows. I’m wondering about the legality of this command and to what extent or limitation is there in this command? If you could shed any light on this, it would be very much appreciated.
No matter the claim, once the government has collected data, it will always have that data. Oh, officials may swear they destroyed it, there may even be a ceremony smashing hard drives, but you can never be certain someone didn't save it "just in case". Data not collected cannot be abused.
Thank you for bringing much clarity to this video, which I had previously watched w/o any accompanying legal commentary. Kudos! While I agree with you that a DNA specimen should not be collected until after conviction, the sad fact that if one is incarcerated, it’s pretty easy to obtain. Eating utensils and drink ware are 2 prime sources even in a jail. Also there is no expectation of privacy regarding one’s garbage.
Doesn’t a cop’s oath mention something about defending the Constitution irrespective of any state or local laws? Meh, when have cops ever been conscientious, critical thinkers?
My concern on such laws: my actual name is very common. In my hypothetical situation, I am in a state with this DNA law, either visiting someone in Alaska or the state I happen to be in enacts this law. I do not have any violent felonies or crimes against persons on my record. So, cop in affected state pulls me over and my name matches that of someone on the list, but because I have a common name, it’s not me. Can I be charged with a felony for not providing DNA, even though I am not the actual person on the list?
I don’t care what they’ve done since I already resolved another case and there comes a time when the government over steps that’s when the people refuse and they use their rights to make sure of it these type of gestapo tactics are not used.
Wow...WTF Alaska....and who's the idiot who signed off on this? Convicted? Sure, submit the DNA...but "just because we arrested you"? Not cool!! Great job as always Andrew!! Thanks for sharing!!
Do they destroy the data? Well, considering a priest heard a confession in a room at a prison with signs all over the place stating no recordings were allowed, and he later found that the prison recorded the Confession of that inmate. He went to court, and the judge eventually ruled that the particular recording be sealed forever, but he would rule that it should be destroyed, despite the fact that it should never have been recorded in the first place.
Best call up your state legislator and see if they have any responsibility for it's passing. And then share that here, in case they have any national aspirations that need tamping down.
I think it's funny that you keep bringing up the "but those people must be murderers or sex offenders" logic, because people forget that equal protection of rights is supposed to apply to criminals too.
@@Andrewflusche I'm saying people tend to be okay with civil rights violations if you tell them it's only for villains. Before they come for the communists and the Jews, they come for the criminals, because hardly anyone cares about protecting criminals, and a lot of people have disdain for those who do, such as lawyers.
@@Andrewflusche it seems like demanding DNA, on the spot, must violate due process, does it not? I mean, for goodness sake, why isn't a subpoena required?
Somebody better sue the state of Alaska over this.
So the SCOTUS can uphold the law once it gets there?
You can't sue until you've been damaged, and that requires they actually collect your DNA first.
@@werefrogofassyria6609 Actually, you can sue for being arrested under false pretenses. There's your damages. They don't even need to take your DNA - though they probably did when they arrested you, leading to the lawsuit anyway.
It will law and enforceable until and unless its declared unconstitutional. For all t hose caught up in the quagmire in the mean time, the damage will already be done. They're not likely to destroy those sample they already have unless ordered to. And even then, its unlikely they will actually do so.
@@werefrogofassyria6609 That's not true, especially for situations involving constitutional rights. Standing can be established before actual damages if it can be shown you are likely to have damages and have sound legal theory as to why it is unlawful.
I’d take that arrest. There are some things one must stand up against. They’re not getting my DNA.
I just hope you haven't sent it in yourself via one of these "ancestry" sites. :(
Spot on! Don’t think for a minute that big brother isn’t mining all of those DNA samples for themselves.
Unfortunately, when they arrest you, they will TAKE the DNA from you, without your consent.
I don't think it matters if you sent it in anymore. They caught the Golden State Killer because a relative of his sent in their own DNA.
I suppose it sounds good. They caught a serial killer. But that's the logic they use to make it mandatory for everybody.
China sure is, they own the majority of them.
This is what tyranny looks like.
this is what the future looks like...
How has this not made it to the Supreme Court yet?
Yeah... Have you seen the 4th Amendment cases from SCOTUS? Not exactly a friend of privacy and liberty.
The Institute for Justice should get on this.
They are too busy revisiting old 1930-1950 civil right cases....
The most Authoritarian Court in the history of the United States is not going to outlaw this.
Two words, mate. Citizens United.
What exactly makes you believe that the current SCOTUS won't uphold it?
My [typo edit] brother was a business owner in Alaska, and he left the state because of that law. And I will NEVER give a single cent to Alaska, and as long as this law remains, I will badmouth the state to every person who mentions Alaska.
This is one reason we need the federal govt OUT of state business... So people can vote with their feet and leave states that do stupid stuff.
@@Andrewflusche The problem is every state does stupid stuff in different areas. There's no escaping government overreach unless we do what the founders did...
@@Andrewflusche hello.my grandson got a speeding ticket by a county sheriff.he told my grandson.he could leave the car and they would tow it.or he could drive away and get a ticket.he didn't have insurance.he drove away and got ticketed.now they want to take finger prints for a dam speeding ticket ????.
He was out working doing grub hub.when he got caught please help.any good lawyers near Dearborn michigan you know of.
@@brentiers it's why (i fully believe) they want gun control. disarm the country (in the name of freedom and safety, while the authorities get all the weaponries they desire) and then you have a good old fashioned police state....Russia 2.0.
@@Andrewflusche Most recent googling gives a rough estimate that we've reached 60% of Americans living paycheck to paycheck. Most of the country literally cannot afford to move to another state.
If a state law is federally illegal, we need a fed that takes action to enforce that, period.
The president at the time had to send the army just to enforce black kids going to desegregated schools.
Very strange to hear a lawyer be out of touch like that. "Dead letter law", and all that. Laws that are not enforced, effectively don't exist.
You talk about similar things all the time on this channel from the angle of freedoms. If you cannot open carry in the "legal" place without the police stopping you, do you really have that right?
If the fed doesn't protect you from an extensive state system of overreach, you have lost those rights in the same way.
This is a clear case where we need the fed to slap this shit down, and quickly.
Does this require a search warrant? Do you have time to talk to an attorney? This seems like a really big deal for police to be able to just walk up to you and say, "Hand it over immediately or you're going to prison."
That's police state unconstitutional for SURE. Should go to SCOTUS asap.
It doesn’t matter. The fourth amendment of the Constitution is quite clear and the state can make up any law they want but that does not help the constitution of the United States people will physically resist and you’re not gonna start cataloging us like animals.
@@peter5.056 The current SCOTUS would probably confirm it as okay.
@@ProfessorJayTee Yep. Slowly but surely, the USA is becoming the USSR. We're not that far from it! A couple more disasters (warranting increased government interference, of course) and the USA is a police state.
@@peter5.056 - No shit, like last year this should have been on the Supreme Court's agenda.
If the law wasn't bad enough, the cop's smug self-satisfied attitude makes me despise him all the further
He shouldn’t have just said “no” but rather “I need to consult with my attorney first” and then remained silent. 👍🏻
LOL @ the "mail in ballots" comment. Bravo, Sir!
Dude that was great, that stood out for sure
I love that concept.
Get the DNA off of a pile of mail-ins, and then the hunt will be on!
@@dangeary2134 Shhhh!!! Don't give Arizona ideas!!! 😮
@@a-liberal-patriot what, and let everyone suffer?
I’d be doing this across the land!
Well, I guess Alaska is off my list of places to move to in order to escape the crazy people. I guess the insane cold and sessmic activity wasnt enough for the alaskan state government to keep people from living there.
alaska is for crazy people to escape, not the other way around. have you seen the amount of persons with active arrest warrants in alaska?
In case you haven't noticed, Alaska is a state full of loons. See Sarah Palin and family.
My first thougjt too
Sounds like you'd be going TO the crazy people by moving to Alaska....🐻
Reckon the best you can do is NH or Switzerland.
This law is pretty insane
How is this Alaskan distoypia law legal AT ALL?
Look around at our country. We're cogs in a machine.
@@Andrewflusche Harsh but not untrue.
@@Andrewflusche I prefer the term wage slaves
How is the drug war not a genocid3? Yea we live in an open air prison now
Politicians can pass almost anything into law, it takes money to fight to get things removed
Happened to me there and charges were completely dropped. Not guilty of anything but they treat you like you are there. Why I won’t go back even though I love the state.
Sounds like Alaska should become part of Russia, again.
You are innocent when we say you are innocent! Cops everywhere.
Gross violation of your right to privacy and completely breaks search and seizure law.
Just got pulled over in PA the other day after leaving work for apparently NOT turning on my headlights in a timely manner after leaving the parking lot at Dusk. Mind you I had my Parking & Fog lights on , But any how I apparently was " Required " to provide PROOF of where I was coming from . I Had to actually Show my Work Schedule & Time clock Punch out time , Other wise I was going to be forced into DUI Testing because it was almost 9pm at night on the Sunday of a Holiday Weekend... So much for being the " Land Of the FREE " , The Old USA seems to be Lost ...
Should have let them arrest you. You don't have to tell them where you were, where you are going, who you where with.
Of course you can tell them going home after being with his wife/boyfriend 💕!
Holy Hell, is there any other states like this? Crazy as hell
Yes. I don't know if any have retroactively expanded the reach of DNA collection quite like this. But Virginia definitely collects DNA for a wide variety of *misdemeanors*. Thankfully we only collect for *convictions* at least.
@@Andrewflusche I'm in NC, I'll research,
@@TommyORourke_ when I was arrested in NC seven years ago I think they collected my DNA
have you ever read 1984? what we have today surpasses all...
@@sbcinema lol, I have ... crazy times
Ed broke the rule, he talked to the police.
The more I hear about 'the law' the more I am disgusted by it. And more so by the endless stream of 'just doing my jobbers' that line up to enforce the bs.
I refused this same request and they threatened to take me into custody and get a warrant to “forcibly” take my blood. I had two attorneys involved and they both ultimately advised me to consent if I didn’t want to be arrested and strapped down in a chair for the procedure.
"they'll have to harvest their DNA from their mail in ballots" 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
I was about to say the same! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
. S l K E !!!!
I love the mail in ballot joke, top notch!
The people have to fight against such laws, we don't have our rights because they were given to us, but because we fought for them.
You can absolutely catch a felony for not giving DNA when required in MA.
Why isn't your DNA protected by the 4th amendment from such an intrusive seizure without due process and a specific court order in relation to a specific crime? This is like a giant drag net where you don't know the sample won't be misused by the state. I'd refuse and have to challenge it too on principle.
likely because SCOTOUS has ruled biometric data is not protected information, this is also why you can be compelled to provide a finger print or retenia scan to unlock encrpyted devices, but can make a claim with a pin code to not do so. The courts decided your biometric data which includes DNA is not private.
I really want to see a video discussing the 'legality' of 'legally detained' versus 'arrested'...because police will place a subject in handcuffs 'for their protection', then proceed to question them...and if they refuse, they are told 'then you will be arrested'...so, you have NO 4th or 5th Amendment rights UNLESS you refuse to talk to them while detained, which then has you arrested (something will be trumped up later)...which is EXACTLY what the 4th Amendment was designed to prevent (unlawful detention or interference with regular citizen movement)...why has this not gone to the Supreme Court?
love the mail in ballot joke!
Taking a DNA sample of everyone you arrest, especially when you later drop the charges... yeah, how is this legal?
It's becoming increasingly apparent, that "laws" are becoming excuses to police every person at all times. At this rate, you'll need to file papers with the court to go take a piss in your own house.
I guess I would plead the 5th, say I'm not refusing but want my lawyer present upon providing a sample. 🤷♀️
"felony, tho." smh
I live in Anchorage Alaska. Yesterday I was pulled over for expired tags. The officer wanted a DNA sample from me as well as finger prints. I got a felony conviction in 2012 for growing Marijuana about a year before it was legalized. A dna sample was taken from me in the courtroom apon conviction. Yet the officer is threatening me with a c felony for refusing to provide a sample. He was harassing me about not wanting to give him my address. I'm not on probation and I am not a sex offender so I do not have to notify them of my residence. WTF did I wake up in nazi Germany or am I still in America? I decided to investigate the matter online and found your video. Any recommendations from an actual attorney would be greatly appreciated and seriously considered.
this is wildly egregious and something needs to be done about it, you raising awareness for this is super helpful.
Since corporations were ruled "people" does that mean shop lifting from a corporation is a "crime against a person" in Alaska but shoplifting from a small "Mom and Pa" store isn't?
Corporations were never ruled people. There is a concept known as corporate personhood which is very different.
Guess I'm removing Alaska from my list of states I'd consider moving to, a shame too
Yes after and only after a conviction should a person's DNA be collected and entered into the system. Just being charged should NOT be a reason to collect DNA, total violation of people's rights.
"I guess the Alaskan authorities can try and harvest their DNA from mail in ballots" in reference to dead people... lol 🤣🤣 I love your channel Andrew! All that you do to inform us is much appreciated.
I laughed out loud at that statement...mail in ballots of dead people for DNA harvesting.
"Try TO harvest...."
thats AZ that harvest ballots...the demoturds will always cheat...
In Florida if you are arrested for a felony (not convicted) the judge will not grant bail until you give them your DNA. Guilty until proven innocent!
So if the constitution forbids and ex-post facto law; then that law is repugnant to the constitution! So what happened to “ a law that is repugnant to the constitution is void”? Alaska just gets to do it anyway and the citizens have to follow an unconstitutional law? Not to mention that Alaska is using an ex-post facto law as a means to perpetuate a writ/ bill of attainder which is also forbidden by the constitution!
They get away with it until somebody who can afford good lawyers challenges it and hopes it reaches a high enough court to render it unconstitutional. Meanwhile, the damage has been done.
Damn what happen to the Fourth Amendment unreasonable searches and seizures by the government?
The short answer is conservative politicians and judges. You know, people who claim to be against big government and loss of personal liberties.
I appreciate your advice more than I can say.
So even worse. In your example, you could have to give your DNA just for being at a sports bar where a fight broke out because someone said they saw you push someone even though you just sat there quietly drinking your beer.
Let freedum ring.
Vote out the maniac responsible for this nonsense. Until gov officials are afraid for their jobs, this madness will continue.
I was leaving Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana a few years ago. I am a retired reservist. I was stopped by the Air Force Security and "asked" to submit to a vehicle search that included sniffer dogs. I was in a bit of a hurry and listened to enough videos like yours to know that you never agree to a search. I was told that I could lose my retired military privileges to come on the base if I did not agree to the search. I realize that military bases have different rules concerning the Fourth Amendment rights. I had given no "probable cause" and had no contraband. I was just vehicle number whatever and was selected out for an outbound search. Finally, they did an abbreviated search and let me go on my way.
There are usually signs at the entry point that state, "authorized entry into this restricted area constitutes consent to search of personnel and property under their control."
That is absolutely Rediculous and unconstitutional
This channel is so underrated.
Take it to a Federal Court, it will be ruled Unconstitutional
Yup. $2million in legal fees and 8 years later, you might get in front of a hostile judge to plead you case, just before you get slapped down by the judge.
@@markrichards6171 You could contact The Institute for Justice, they love these cases
Isn't Alaska under the 9th circuit? If so, no tyranny is unconstitutional.
@@Heather-xm9ul The ninth circuit has been ruling better this year
“Harvest theirs from their mail-in ballots”😂😂😂😂
JUST GIVE EM A STOOL SAMPLE!! HA HA HA
Guess I'm not going to Alaska anytime soon. Totally law abiding but that law should be unconstitutional.
What ever made you think that being law abiding was any protection from these people? They want YOU TOO.
I'd lawyer up and sue.
With regards to your view of collecting DNA from those convicted of "serious or violent" offenses - isn't that nothing more than collecting evidence from people based on the presumption that they will commit another crime in the future? Thus, a "presumption of guilt" and not a "presumption of innocence". Isn't that also a violation of their 5th and 4th amendment protections: providing information that can be used against themselves, and warrantless seizures?
Laws like these won't stand the test of time, methinks.
Very good argument. Submitting violates your 5th amendment rights.
We may see changes with a SCOTUS ruling about passcodes to phones, but in general DNA is treated just like fingerprints and treated as physical evidence that can be collected rather than speech/testimony that requires you to do something. There's obviously a great argument that automatically collecting DNA for any arrest in which there's no crime scene DNA they're trying to math is a search that should require a warrant (for which there wouldn't be probable cause since there's no DNA to match with), but good luck with that. The current court is happy to rule against the government in a lot of things, but police action against individuals isn't one of them.
@@suedenim9208 Very well-said! All we can do is hope that it will be fair-minded, and very smart, people deciding what's just. See Timmie - your vote does matter.
Hard to believe Alaska has gone this way. I lived there twice and it was always the atmosphere of people leaving everyone's else alone.
Ppl leaving you alone is not the same as government leaving you alone.
At trial: You are innocent until proven guilty. BUT : From being accused until you are at trial you are guilty while the police and prosecutors dig for evidence.
Seen the footage last month. The cop was in error. Or rather the court order is in error. They ALREADY HAVE his DNA on file. The warrant is void. The damage done.
What I am struggling to understand is how, after being adjudicated as "not guilty", the Alaskan government thinks they can *take anything at all* from someone without due process?
Also, why didn't you show what happened after he told the cop "no"?
I think the full vid shows him refusing, and ultimately the cop let's him go
They do it all the time. Your online stuff they get not with warrants, but the buy it from brokers. Simple. Your DNA they may get from doctors or labs now. Everyone makes you sign wavers to private info. Goes to insurance companies to pay claims, but do you trust insurance companies not to sell or share with brokers or agents of other companies?? Do you feel lucky?
Andrew, you left a few questions unanswered:
Has the ex post facto aspect of this law been litigated? What was the result?
And while you said that Ed can't be arrested on felony charges for refusing to provide a DNA sample, does that mean he can he be arrested on a misdemeanor charge instead? If so, that still puts a high price on his refusal.
Isn't Alaska a far-right, "Freedom" state? You know, "keep the government out of my business"? Apparently, they don't take that seriously after all..
So has this law been appealed to the Supremes under the 4 Amm. Unreasonable Search and Seizure?
Collecting DNA without conviction is common - Under California law, law enforcement in California is required to collect DNA samples from anyone arrested on suspicion of a felony crime. California maintains a DNA database for felons and individuals arrested for felony offenses.
Thanks for the informative and entertaining video! I like your work very much!!!!!!
Time for Alaskans to demand repeal of the law, or take this one to the federal courts and get it overturned.
Alaska the Last Frontier of USA. Is the pilot test State for the rest of the States. Many times when things are implemented they are usually tested in lesser known/uncommon places before it is fully implemented everywhere.
@chuck 8094 - Immediately
If a crime isn't "against another person", it probably shouldn't be a crime.
Cool. I'll be over to steal all of your personal property while you're at work.
Don't really subscribe to you tube channels but after watching a couple of yours the entertainment value and legal knowledge is something nobody should miss.
I fell off the chair laughing at the harvesting DNA from dead people off mail-in ballots.😂
Wouldn't retroactive seizures of DNA be considered unreasonable under the 4th amendment, due to the fact that the individual is already determined not guilty and due to the invasiveness of the seizure?
The problem is that you will have a hard time arguing that on the side of the road with some officer who thinks he's just doing his job.
@@silverdeals243 naturally, but I was thinking you would comply, making it clear you are acting under threat of arrest, and then take legal action after
Conviction or acquittal is irrelevant. As I see it, what matters is that when a past case is done any effort to collect DNA is a new and separate search and therefore has to meet the requirements of the 4th amendment.
Thanks, Andrew 😁
Holy cow! Would have expected this in New Jersey, not Alaska. Thanks for the video.
Hi Andrew, last week I observed a NYC cop pull over a vehicle and after the car pulled to the curb, the cop (over his megaphone) shouted to the driver “lower ALL of your windows!” Meaning all four front and back windows. I’m wondering about the legality of this command and to what extent or limitation is there in this command? If you could shed any light on this, it would be very much appreciated.
Insanity! Tyrrants! Abolish, qualified immunity!
Absolutely QI needs do go away.
No matter the claim, once the government has collected data, it will always have that data. Oh, officials may swear they destroyed it, there may even be a ceremony smashing hard drives, but you can never be certain someone didn't save it "just in case". Data not collected cannot be abused.
Thank you for bringing much clarity to this video, which I had previously watched w/o any accompanying legal commentary. Kudos! While I agree with you that a DNA specimen should not be collected until after conviction, the sad fact that if one is incarcerated, it’s pretty easy to obtain. Eating utensils and drink ware are 2 prime sources even in a jail. Also there is no expectation of privacy regarding one’s garbage.
Doesn’t a cop’s oath mention something about defending the Constitution irrespective of any state or local laws? Meh, when have cops ever been conscientious, critical thinkers?
Police agencies will not hire people who are too smart.
@@markrichards6171 Ain't that the sad truth...
And this is what happens in the state when you allow rank Choice voting to get in all these horrific politicians
My concern on such laws: my actual name is very common. In my hypothetical situation, I am in a state with this DNA law, either visiting someone in Alaska or the state I happen to be in enacts this law. I do not have any violent felonies or crimes against persons on my record. So, cop in affected state pulls me over and my name matches that of someone on the list, but because I have a common name, it’s not me. Can I be charged with a felony for not providing DNA, even though I am not the actual person on the list?
Your identification card/license check would be proof enough to verify that you merely share a name, not the crime.
This is the most screwy thing I've heard of since Civil Asset Forfeiture. I'm flabbergasted.
Have there been any litigation or appeals to this law?
You are a great guy! Offering expert legal advice for free......I sure wish that I'd had you and UA-cam as an adolescent!
Hell, I wish we'd had the internet. Let's just say that less things would've been unintentionally destroyed.
I don’t care what they’ve done since I already resolved another case and there comes a time when the government over steps that’s when the people refuse and they use their rights to make sure of it these type of gestapo tactics are not used.
Note to self…..stay away from Alaska. My vacation spots are dropping one by one.
Nice ballot dig, Andrew!
Unbelievable !
Wow...WTF Alaska....and who's the idiot who signed off on this? Convicted? Sure, submit the DNA...but "just because we arrested you"? Not cool!!
Great job as always Andrew!! Thanks for sharing!!
Alaska used to be a good free state. Our country is dying.
I don't expect it to last the century.
The class action from this could bankrupt the state.
Thank you
Does the qualifying offense have to be committed in Alaska?
Leave it to a GOP controlled state, to pass a law giving the government rights to YOUR body
Well that's terrifying
Good mail in ballot joke, well played sir.
Do they destroy the data? Well, considering a priest heard a confession in a room at a prison with signs all over the place stating no recordings were allowed, and he later found that the prison recorded the Confession of that inmate. He went to court, and the judge eventually ruled that the particular recording be sealed forever, but he would rule that it should be destroyed, despite the fact that it should never have been recorded in the first place.
I'm in Alaska. wtf I never would of expected something like this here. This is ridiculous
Best call up your state legislator and see if they have any responsibility for it's passing.
And then share that here, in case they have any national aspirations that need tamping down.
@chuck 8094 already ahead of ya on that!
I think it's funny that you keep bringing up the "but those people must be murderers or sex offenders" logic, because people forget that equal protection of rights is supposed to apply to criminals too.
My point is that people likely assume DNA collection is only for offenses that society considers heinous.
@@Andrewflusche I'm saying people tend to be okay with civil rights violations if you tell them it's only for villains. Before they come for the communists and the Jews, they come for the criminals, because hardly anyone cares about protecting criminals, and a lot of people have disdain for those who do, such as lawyers.
@@Andrewflusche it seems like demanding DNA, on the spot, must violate due process, does it not? I mean, for goodness sake, why isn't a subpoena required?
Thank you, great point
So, how did that interaction end? What happened to Ed?
He's probably still sitting in county lock-up waiting to get before a judge who will just order him to comply anyway.
Cops have such a hard job. Somebody has to hold the oven door open for the rest of us.
Sounds like a Supreme Court case in the making.
Same ole💩
Wyoming County, Pa collects DNA even for contempt of court people whom are sent to jail.
Some brave person is going to have to take the arrest and take it to the Supreme Court.
Whoever that person is, I have some money waiting to go on his/her books 😁
Always love the info. Love the backlighting…. The music is a bit of a distraction. LOVE your content!
Oh! Mail in ballot comment ... love it!
kudos for the mail-in ballot joke, was not lost on me here. thanks