The state of Michigan is being sued by parents of newborns' whose blood was sampled by the state without a warrant.

"It has been well-established that drawing a person's blood for analysis constitutes a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment," explains the complaint filed against the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, various doctors and the Michigan Neonatal Biobank Inc.

"The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees the right of persons to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, including the state of Michigan, its agencies, and those that work for in in cahoots with those agencies."

While the state program to "seize" blood from newborns for testing against various diseases "is a noble public policy idea," the method that the state as implemented "violates the United States Constitution," the complaint contends.

TRENDING: 'Greater shakings': Jonathan Cahn foresaw 2020 trouble, warns of even more

The lawsuit seeks an order to stop the practice, destroy the data illegally collected and "return to the parents all blood samples and spots of infants which defendants have caused to be seized and stored indefinitely without informed consent."

Twila Brase of the Citizens' Council for Health Freedom explained why the dispute is a big deal.

Under the state's policy, the child's DNA becomes government property and then it is up to officials how it's used and to whom it is given.

"Individuals have a right to not know what their genetic code says and to not have it known by outsiders," she wrote.

Further, the state could sequence DNA to predetermine diseases, violating the child's genetic privacy.

"Outsiders could use the DNA for objectionable research," she continued, and researchers could re-identify individuals.

Such documentation also reveals the genetics of the mother and other family members, without their permission, and the Nuremberg Code provides that no one should be a research subject without consent.

She explains how new father Philip Ellison, a lawyer, "got nine other families together in a federal lawsuit" over the procedures.

On a website, Ellison charges the state has "purposely failed to obtain express consent from the newborn or his/her legal guardian, or to secure a required search warrant before taking the blood into the custody of the state government."

"But even more problematic, the state government keeps the excess blood samples without obtaining the consent or permission of parents or legal guardians. … Many parents, including the parents in this legal action, lacked a complete understanding or full knowledge that the blood or blood spots being drawn from their newborn child were being turned over the government while their precious new additions to their families were in the care of hospital staff."

Ellison says that through "various Supreme Court cases, it has been held that drawing a person’s blood for analysis constitutes a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment."

"Because it is a search, any governmental official who desires to do the same must either secure a judicial warrant (by explaining and proving to a judge there is a valid purpose for the blood draw) or fit within one of the narrow exceptions."

The claim is that "since at least 1987, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services has been quietly keeping the extra blood spots which were not needed once the primary disease-based testing was complete. It is unclear why they decided to do this. The Michigan Legislature has never expressly authorized this action."

The DHHS Institutional Review Board also simply said the government didn't need to obtain consent.

"This entire process violates the United States Constituiton and must be ordered stopped in the absence of consent, the samples illegally taken by destroyed (in the absence of retroactive consent), and appropriate reimbursement of losses to be paid by those who stole the blood of millions of newborn children," the complaint demands.

Plaintiffs include Adam and Ashley Kanuszewski, Shannon LaPorte, Lynette Wiegand and children identified only by their initials.

Along with the Fourth Amendment violations, the complaint alleges conspiracy and liberty due process rights violations.

Brase said it is not the first such case. Lawsuits in Minnesota and Texas provided relief to parents who objected to the state demanding DNA information on newborns.