Lol! My man, Did you even bother to read the SCOTUS decision?

The case involves compulsory WARRANTLESS seizures of blood ...

When one is pulled over for suspected DUI and fails the roadside testing program and exhibits signs of intoxication etcetera, the officer, under probable cause, can make an arrest for suspect DUI. From there the officer can submit a warrant for a blood test, which an on call judge will sign off on based on the officers arrest affidavit, for the drivers blood to be tested at hospital for driving under the influence

Theres no wiggling out of it once a warrant has been issued for the blood. Now sometimes judges aren't available for warrant signatures. So the next step would be a calibrated breathalyzer machine, which most police departments own. Refusing a blood/ chemical test and or Breathalyzer is not an option without severe consequence attached.

> Intoxicated driving is a serious criminal charge. During a DUI investigation, an officer may request a blood sample. This is especially true when an alleged suspect refuses a breathalyzer test or a police officer believes the suspect is intoxicated by drugs. If you do not agree to it, a warrant may be issued, and at that time, a blood sample will be taken with or without your consent.

A lot of confusion surrounds what your rights and obligations are with respect to drunk driving and blood tests.

I’m not a lawyer, but the state website seems to say otherwise.

https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=75&div=0&chpt=15&sctn=47&subsctn=0&mobile_choice=suppress

> If any person placed under arrest for a violation of section 3802 is requested to submit to chemical testing and refuses to do so, the testing shall not be conducted but upon notice by the police officer, the department shall suspend the operating privilege of the person as follows: (i) Except as set forth in subparagraph (ii), for a period of 12 months.

Again, I’m not a lawyer, or anything close to it, I’m just reading the statues on the website.