&gt; <i>Couldn&#x27;t the same be said for a breathalyzer?</i><p>Yes, actually, and that question (wrt <i>criminal</i> penalties some states have heaped on) happens to be in front of the Supreme Court right now in Birchfield v. North Dakota[1] (though not for the first amendment, GP is off course there).<p>Sibling comments are correct on the legal theory behind allowing punishments for refusing to take a breathalyzer test, but it&#x27;s clearly questionable whether a state should be allowed to issue criminal penalties for availing yourself of your rights. If such a thing were generally allowed, warrants wouldn&#x27;t be necessary in most cases: let us search your person&#x2F;phone&#x2F;car&#x2F;house&#x2F;papers without a warrant unless you want severe automatic penalties, etc.<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.scotusblog.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;04&#x2F;argument-analysis-criminal-penalties-for-refusal-to-take-a-breathalyzer-test-in-jeopardy&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.scotusblog.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;04&#x2F;argument-analysis-criminal...</a>