The Miranda Decision

Miranda v. Arizona, a 1966 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren, required that police officers inform a criminal suspect of his or her basic constitutional rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to consult with an attorney, before the suspect may be questioned. Any incriminating statement made after arrest, but in the absence of such a warning, was inadmissible as evidence in a trial. Miranda has been called "certainly the most significant criminal law decision of the Warren era, if not in the entire history of the United States Supreme Court" (Lasser, 1988, p. 191).

It was also one of the most politically controversial decisions in the history of the Court. For conservatives, and indeed for many ordinary Americans, it served to gel the notion that the courts, and particularly the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren, were excessively lenient on criminal suspects and excessively restrictive of the police. It was frequently argued that the Court had "handcuffed the police" (Hickok, 1991, p. 297). Two years later, Richard Nixon was elected President. One of his stated goals was to appoint judges that would be "strict constructionists" of the Constitution -- meaning, most of all, that they would interpret the Bill of Rights in a more narrow and restrictive manner as applied to deviant or unpopular behavior, and most especially as applied to the rights of criminal suspects and defendants. The nomination of conse

Related Essays

MIRANDA V. ARIZONA This research paper discusse .... Political Influences and Impact of Miranda The Miranda decision was directly affected by politics in that the swing vote was provided by a Johnson appointee .... (2707 11 )

How Supreme Court Justices Decide Cases .... The Mapp decision is probably the most controversial, followed by the Miranda decision, and with much less concern expressed over Gideon. .... (2690 11 )

How the Supreme Court Decides Cases .... The Mapp decision is probably the most controversial, followed by the Miranda decision, and with much less concern expressed over Gideon. .... (2709 11 )

Gated Communities in the US .... Etzioni cites such challenges to traditional conceptions of civil society as the "cult" of criminal rights following the Miranda decision, or alternatively .... (2928 12 )

Welfare reform .... So also are the Miranda decision and Affirmative Action and the Department of Education's regulations about bilingual education (Murray, 1984, 13). .... (2181 9 )

n conservative enmity toward the Court, and the decision that conservatives most wanted to overturn. Roe v. Wade would have a profound impact in reshaping the Court debate a decade later, but in 1973 its primary impact still lay far in the future. Gradually, meanwhile, Miranda became accepted law and practice. As we have suggested above, it became a standard fixture of TV crime dramas, giving the final arrest of the villain a greater dramatic weight than the old, brief "book 'em." Politically, it became part of the regular litany of liberal Supreme Court decisions that were alleged to have "handcuffed" the police. A broad spectrum of Americans became, and remain, convinced that the courts "coddle criminals." This writer has heard that specific phrase more than once, in casual conversation with friends and family members, sometimes uttered by individuals who are by no means conservative in their overall views. Miranda is by no means the only element in this perception. Few people could identify the Miranda decision by name, though most would probably recognize the "Miranda warning" because of its frequent use by Hollywood. The perception of overly lenient courts has been fed not only by Miranda and other decisions restrict

Category: Government - T