Well, if the DNA sample is taken from an arrested person because a law permits the government to do it, then by definition that's due process of law. The Fourth Amendment issue is separate -- a law that permits an unreasonable search satisfies due process but nevertheless still violates the Fourth Amendment -- but here as well Congress is entitled to determine whether such a search is reasonable in the cases of persons who are arrested. If the arrestee thinks that the search is unreasonable despite the law, he can ask a court to declare the law unconstitutional, either generally or as applied to him in the particular case. My guess is that he would lose, and deservedly so.
And if they are acquitted, there is no penalty or punishment assigned. That is also part of due process. If you allow the government to put the DNA of an innocent man in a criminal database, it's just a simple additional step to have EVERYONE submit their DNA - because you have trampled over due process to achieve your goals.
Nonsense. Due process has nothing to do with legislation.
Not to mention, laws don't trump the constitution.
The Fourth Amendment issue is separate -- a law that permits an unreasonable search satisfies due process but nevertheless still violates the Fourth Amendment -- but here as well Congress is entitled to determine whether such a search is reasonable in the cases of persons who are arrested. If the arrestee thinks that the search is unreasonable despite the law, he can ask a court to declare the law unconstitutional, either generally or as applied to him in the particular case. My guess is that he would lose, and deservedly so.
No offence, but you need a remedial course in civics. You have a flawed understanding of the constitution and rights.
Whatever happened to simply being able to opt out?