[Spooky23]

I think the courts have this one right. Your finger is a characteristic of you, not compelled speech.

If you can compel a suspect to stand up on a lineup, or produce id, there's no reason why the court shouldn't be able to compel you to produce a finger.

In technical terms, the finger is really a "something you have" second authentication factor. If you think of it on those terms, it's more like looking at someone's Hardware token than compelling a password disclosure.

[Lawtonfogle]

>Your finger is a characteristic of you, not compelled speech.

So is all your knowledge. The technology to extract it doesn't yet exist, but once it does, should it be deployed by the courts without a challenge from the 5th Amendment?

[Spooky23]

Clearly there's going to have to be some evolution from a legal standpoint once accessing your thoughts is a mere fMRI away.