@article{ref1,
title="Roadside saliva swab testing: a solution to drugged driving or a violation of the Fourth Amendment right to privacy?",
journal="Connecticut law review",
year="2021",
author="Ormrod, Demery J.",
volume="53",
number="2",
pages="509-538",
abstract="In Birchfield v. North Dakota, the Supreme Court recognized a distinction between substitute methods for testing blood alcohol contents: pursuant to a DUI arrest, breathalyzer tests may be performed without a warrant, whereas blood draws (even if pursued for the exact same reason) may not. My focus here, in this Note, is on roadside saliva swab testing, a method used by police to determine whether a driver is driving under the influence of cannabis. Ultimately, this Note argues for warranted saliva swab testing, resting on a straightforward analogy: A is more like B than it is like C--or, in this particular case, saliva swabs are more like blood draws than breathalyzer tests. And, for this reason, as with blood draws, officers should be required to procure a warrant prior to conducting a roadside saliva swab test.   Available: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/law_review/500  Copyright © 2021 The author<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0010-6151",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}