Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/12pdf/11-1425_cb8e.pdf
Page Number: 19

Cite as:  569 U. S. ____ (2013) 

15 

Opinion of the Court 
Opinion of SOTOMAYOR, J. 

not  say  that  roadside  blood  draws  are  necessarily  un- 
reasonable,  and  if  we  accepted  THE  CHIEF  JUSTICE’s  ap­
proach, they would become a more attractive option for the 
police. 

III 
The  remaining  arguments  advanced  in  support  of  a 

per se exigency rule are unpersuasive. 

The State and several of its amici, including the United
States,  express  concern  that  a  case-by-case  approach  to
exigency  will  not  provide  adequate  guidance  to  law  en­
forcement officers deciding whether to conduct a blood test
of a drunk-driving suspect without a warrant.  THE CHIEF 
JUSTICE and the dissent also raise this concern.  See post, 
at 1, 9–10 (opinion of ROBERTS, C. J.); post, at 5–7 (opinion 
of  THOMAS, J.).    While  the  desire  for  a  bright-line  rule  is 
understandable,  the  Fourth  Amendment  will  not  tolerate 
adoption  of  an  overly  broad  categorical  approach  that 
would dilute the warrant requirement in a context where 
significant  privacy  interests  are  at  stake.  Moreover,  a 
case-by-case approach is hardly unique within our Fourth 
Amendment  jurisprudence.    Numerous  police  actions
are  judged  based  on  fact-intensive,  totality  of  the  circum­
stances  analyses  rather  than  according  to  categorical 
rules, including in situations that are more likely to require 
police  officers  to  make  difficult  split-second  judgments.
See,  e.g.,  Illinois  v.  Wardlow,  528  U. S.  119,  123–125 
(2000)  (whether  an  officer  has  reasonable  suspicion  to 
make an investigative stop and to pat down a suspect for 
weapons  under  Terry  v.  Ohio,  392  U. S.  1  (1968));  Robi-
nette, 519 U. S., at 39–40 (whether valid consent has been 
given to search); Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U. S. 1, 8–9, 20 
(1985) (whether force used to effectuate a seizure, includ­
ing  deadly  force,  is  reasonable).  As  in  those  contexts,  we
see no valid substitute for careful case-by-case evaluation