Missouri state Sen. Brian Nieves has introduced a bill that would nullify federal “voluntary” checkpoints in the Show Me State.

Senate Bill 797 would bar any law enforcement agency or employee of the national highway traffic safety administration from establishing a voluntary roadside checkpoint or roadblock pattern to collect breath, blood or saliva samples from motorists.

The bill would block roadblocks set up as part of a multimillion dollar federal study run by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation based in Maryland operates the checkpoints, run by uniformed officers. Officers offer motorists cash for DNA samples, generally $10 for a cheek-swab and $50 for blood. Officers reportedly up the ante for motorists who refuse, offering $100.

The issue of such checkpoints gained national attention last fall when the Fort Worth, TX police department set up roadblocks for a checkpoint on behalf of the NHTSA. Daily Tech reported:

The Fort Worth Police Department (FWPD) installed the roadblock north of the city during daytime traffic.  They flagged down some motorists at random and asked them to give breath, saliva, and blood samples.  The FWPD claims the effort was “100 percent voluntary” and anonymous.

It acknowledges that most of the drivers had broken no law, but it said the effort was valuable to federal contractors working to complete a 3 year, $7.9M USD survey on behalf of the The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) aimed a collecting medical data for use in combatting drunk driving.

But some of the motorists who submitted samples are outraged saying that the program infringed on their Constitutional rights and that the FWPD’s “please” did not make it clear that the seizure of medical samples was “voluntary”.

Police State USA reports that the check points intimidate and bribe drivers and don’t really count as “voluntary.”

“They’re essentially lying to you when they say it’s completely voluntary, because they’re testing you at that moment,” Colosi said.

Missouri State Rep. Rory Ellinger said the checkpoints were intimidating and unnecessary. “To the average person, all the authority and prosecutorial demeanor of an officer directing you to pull over amounts to an order, not a voluntary act,” said Ellinger, an attorney representing the University City, MO, area.

Going beyond the payment, pressure and appearance of an official requirement, Ft Worth police were still carrying out one part of the tests even on those who refused to participate. From TechDirt:

Worse yet is the fact that even if you opted out of everything including the unpaid breathalyzer test, the Ft. Worth police department was still performing one check without securing permission from any drivers.

Apparently on the consent form that officers gave “voluntary” participants, fine print informed the driver that [the police had taken] “passive alcohol sensor readings before the consent process has been completed.”

It’s unclear whether drivers could ask for that data to be deleted if they didn’t want it to be collected, but what is clear is that most drivers did not notice the fine print or were unable to read it. As a result what the FWPD claimed was a “voluntary” scientific study became what appears to be an involuntary search of citizens who were breaking no law.The NHTSA defended these non-stops by stating everything was “voluntary” and that law enforcement officers were only on hand for “safety” reasons. But the passive alcohol test wasn’t voluntary. And the officers never bothered to point out stopping was voluntary until after the test subjects had actually stopped.

The federal government lacks constitutional authority to fund or run such a study, and there is no legal or constitutional requirement for state or local law enforcement to help the federal government carry it out. This bill would nullify the effort in Missouri.

SB797 has had a second reading and was referred to the Senate Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee.

If you are a Missouri resident, call members of the Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee here. Tell them politely, but firmly to schedule a committee hearing and to vote YES on SB 797.

Kelli Sladick

The 10th Amendment

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”



Featured Articles

On the Constitution, history, the founders, and analysis of current events.

featured articles


Tenther Blog and News

Nullification news, quick takes, history, interviews, podcasts and much more.

tenther blog


State of the Nullification Movement

232 pages. History, constitutionality, and application today.

get the report


Path to Liberty

Our flagship podcast. Michael Boldin on the constitution, history, and strategy for liberty today

path to liberty


Maharrey Minute

The title says it all. Mike Maharrey with a 1 minute take on issues under a 10th Amendment lens. maharrey minute

Tenther Essentials

2-4 minute videos on key Constitutional issues - history, and application today


Join TAC, Support Liberty!

Nothing helps us get the job done more than the financial support of our members, from just $2/month!



The 10th Amendment

History, meaning, and purpose - the "Foundation of the Constitution."

10th Amendment



Get an overview of the principles, background, and application in history - and today.