TRENTON, N.J.—Today, a group of New Jersey parents and their attorneys from the Institute for Justice (IJ) filed an amended complaint in their lawsuit challenging the state’s policy of keeping the blood it takes from newborn babies for years, all without parental consent. The amended complaint comes in response to a partial dismissal of the lawsuit by U.S. District Court Judge Georgette Castner on Aug. 8.
“New Jersey law requires medical personnel to puncture babies’ heels, extract their blood, and test it for diseases without parental consent. Even once testing is complete, New Jersey holds onto babies’ blood samples for years to use for unrelated purposes, again without asking parents for permission.” said IJ Attorney Christie Hebert. “That violates the U.S. Constitution, which protects parents’ rights to protect both their children’s blood and genetic information.”
Parents Erica and Jeremiah Jedynak, and mother Rev. Hannah Lovaglio, teamed up with IJ in November 2023 to file a federal lawsuit against the state over its blood retention policies. At that time, the New Jersey Department of Health would draw blood from every newborn to test for certain rare diseases and then, post-testing, would hold onto those blood samples for 23 years, all without any guard rails on how those samples could be used. Following IJ’s lawsuit, in June 2024, the state made modest reforms that shortened the time frame that the blood samples are held from 23 years to two years. However, the reforms did not require the state to ask parents for consent as to whether it could keep the samples or how they could be used—so the parents kept their lawsuit going. And nothing prevents the state from changing its policy in the future if political winds shift.
“As a mother, it concerns me that I have no way of knowing what the government is doing with my child’s genetic information after the initial testing period,” said Erica. “It makes me uncomfortable knowing this information could be used by private third parties, law enforcement, or any other government agency.”
In dismissing the complaint, Judge Castner said it wasn’t clear that “the interests in residual dried blood spots should be treated the same as real property.” But as the amended complaint shows, the blood in a child’s body is his or her own, and that doesn’t change when state law orders that that blood be physically taken from those children’s bodies and kept by the state to use as it sees fit—all without permission. The U.S. Supreme Court, after all, has repeatedly held that official conduct must receive Fourth Amendment scrutiny.
With the amended complaint filed, the case now will head back to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey.