Does "High court's DNA case [b]pits [/b]crime solving vs. privacy" mean...?

Writing from a third person point of view, the title means that the High Court's DNA case puts crime solving in conflict and in direct opposition with the idea of privacy. From one aspect, taking and storing DNA samples before convictions can potentially make solving crime and catching criminals easier, but in another aspect some individuals feel as if their privacy is compromised (ex: "subject to contamination, misinterpretation, sample switches and outright fraud."). This conflict that creates disparity and direct opposition between crime solving and privacy, is what's meant by "pits"in this case. Likely this opposition may end depending on how the justices rule in the case.