Norman-Bloodsaw v. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory

The ruling created a significant legal precedent protecting employees or job applicants from medical testing without their prior knowledge and approval. In an era of rising health care costs and insurance liabilities, more employers sought means for reducing their financial risks. The court reasserted an individual's right to privacy and freedom from discrimination based on a person's medical condition that may have no bearing on their ability to perform the work. Concerns over the privacy of genetic information led a dozen states to pass legislation prohibiting genetic discrimination in the workplace.

Developments in the late twentieth century in genetics, including genetic screening, and electronic data keeping introduced substantial new legal questions. Genetic screening is the examination of a person's genetic makeup to determine their tendency to acquire or carry certain diseases. Such screening first began to attract significant state and federal legislative action in the seventies. The Genetic Diseases Act of 1976 allowed for use of public funds to support voluntary genetic screening programs. States passed laws requiring the screening of school children for sickle cell anemia as well as voluntary premarital testing. Concerns mounted that genetic screening could lead to discrimination as certain genetic diseases were more prevalent in some ethnic groups than others, as well as gender differences. For this reason, many believed any form of compulsory testing would violate the search and seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment and the 1964 Civil Rights Act among other legal concerns. Supporters of the use of screening claimed legitimate state interests were involved in promoting quality of life of its citizens and minimizing drains on public funds.