The Winchester paper, in this article about the Fairfax County district court ruling that part of the Virginia drunk-driving law is unconstitutional, quotes one prosecutor as saying: "I wonder if the judge has his resume ready." Ouch.
I haven't studied this issue, but I've been thinking about it. If the legislature can't draw the line and say that 0.8 BAC is too drunk to drive, how can it say, for example, that some particular age is too young to give consent? I thought that such distinctions are the very stuff of legislative discretion, and there is no constitutional infirmity so long as the legislature acts within the broad limits of constitutional due process. Maybe I'm missing the point.