What was determined in Maryland v. King regarding DNA collection?

In Maryland v. King, the Supreme Court ruled that the collection of DNA from individuals who are arrested for serious offenses is constitutional under the Fourth Amendment. The Court held that collecting DNA is akin to fingerprinting and photographing, which are standard practices in the booking process. The rationale behind this decision is the need for law enforcement to identify suspects accurately and to protect the public from potential threats.

The ruling emphasized that DNA collection serves legitimate interests, such as solving past crimes and preventing future offenses, particularly when the individual is arrested for a serious crime. Importantly, the Court recognized that the privacy interests of arrestees are diminished given the nature of the arrest and the governmental interest in effective law enforcement.

This context clarifies why the correct choice pertains specifically to the constitutionality of DNA collection at the time of arrest. Other options do not align with the findings of the case, as they either misinterpret the ruling’s allowances or suggest restrictions that were not supported by the Court’s decision.