According to Washington state’s highest court, random urine tests for drugs and alcohol for people charged with but not yet convicted of DUI are unconstitutional because they are too invasive. The court, which reached its decision with a 5-4 majority, also said that based on state law, urine testing at the pretrial stage could only be done for people who had prior DUI convictions or who were facing felony charges.

Under current law, a judge can order a person facing charges to refrain from drugs and alcohol until the case is resolved. How or whether that can be monitored is under review. State Sen. Mike Padden has introduced a bill that would allow judges to order random urine tests. However, according to the public defender who argued the case before the Supreme Court, a legislature cannot overturn a Supreme Court decision with a bill.

The public defender also says that an alternative might be a transdermal bracelet that would detect whether a person was drinking alcohol. However, it is not yet certain how far-reaching the court’s decision will be. Of the three DUI cases involved, two had no convictions and the third was for driving under the influence of marijuana. Therefore, it appeared that in at least two of the cases, there was no basis for assuming the person charged would not comply.

Observing a person’s civil rights during an investigation and when taking a person into custody is critical. If those rights are violated, the evidence or even the entire case could be thrown out. A person who is facing drunk driving charges may want to talk to an attorney about how to respond, since a conviction could lead to fines and incarceration in some cases.