By Daily Mail Reporter and Associated Press PUBLISHED: 14:10 EST, 3 June 2013 | UPDATED: 14:56 EST, 3 June 2013 The Supreme Court has ruled that police can collect DNA from anyone they arrest, equating a DNA cheek swab to common jailhouse procedures like take fingerprints and mug shots. Civil liberties groups condemned Monday's decision - saying it amounts to creating a 'gaping new exception to the Fourth Amendment' by allowing authorities to collect a person's DNA and add it to national criminal databases without a warrant - no matter whether they are convicted or not. The split 5-4 decision saw conservative Justice Antonin Scalia join three liberal colleagues, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, in opposing the ruling.
@highlight
Justice Antonin Scalia joined liberal colleagues, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, in opposing the ruling
@highlight
FBI keeps DNA database of 1.1million arrestees and 10milion crimes
@highlight
Justice Anthony Kennedy likened taking DNA swabs to jailers taking fingerprints and booking photos
@highlight
Case centers on Maryland felon Alonzo King Jr., who was convicted of violent sex crime after he was arrested for unrelated assault
@highlight
DNA taken at King's jail booking matched evidence from 2003 rape
Antonin Scalia
Antonin Scalia
rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason,' @placeholder said in a sharp dissent, which he read aloud in the
Fourth Amendment
The five justices who ruled in favor of allowing routine DNA collection said it was similar to practices already allowed under the @placeholder - which protects against unreasonable searches and seizure of property.
Anthony Kennedy
In his ruling, @placeholder did not say whether the court's decision limits DNA only to those crimes, but he did note that other states' DNA collection laws differ from Maryland's.