"Suspicionless searches are never allowed if their principal end is ordinary crime-solving," Scalia wrote.
Defenders of the Maryland law at the center of the case argue that the DNA samples are collected and tested as an important crime-fighting tool.
Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, a Democrat, said the result would be less crime, while providing resolution for open investigations.
That may be true, but do the ends justify the means if the process by which the evidence is gathered is illegal?
Additionally, Scalia suggests that a predictable consequence of the court's decision is "your DNA can be taken and entered into a national DNA database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason."
Under Maryland's law, and the law as it exists in 27 other states, being taken into police custody makes a person a de facto suspect in every unsolved crime.
Americans have a right to expect their government to make a good faith effort to protect them from crime and violence. However, that must be accomplished without being overly invasive.
That is clearly established in the Fourth Amendment, and it was understood by the country's early patriots who witnessed firsthand the abuse that accompanies warrantless searches.
Kercheval is host of TalkLine, broadcast by the MetroNews Statewide Radio Network from 10 a.m. to noon Monday through Friday. The show can be heard locally on WCHS 580 AM.