Here are some links to good articles about the warrantless blood draw case (Missouri v. McNeely) that was argued before the United States Supreme Court Wednesday:
Here is the transcript of the oral argument.
Slate’s Emily Bazelon wrote an article (before the oral arguments) that considers the pros and cons for each side and suggests a compromise may be in order.
NPR’s Nina Totenberg says that the justices were skeptical of the prosecutor’s arguments to eliminate the need for warrants, but did see that this need might be justified in some cases.
SCOTUSBLOG’s Lyle Denniston has an argument recap suggesting that the Justices’ questioning did in fact seem to suggest a compromise decision. (Mr. Denniston also wrote an excellent argument preview outlining the issues in the case).
Update: Here is another good read: Orin Kerr’s take over at Volokh Consiracy: He wonders how important the warrant requirement is in light of modern technology.