Expected reversal of Miranda requires states to step up on policing

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text:

Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee
@DLCC
The Supreme Court is likely to overturn its Miranda decision, which means it would be up to the state legislatures to decide whether police are required to warn people of their rights during an arrest.

thehill.com
Expected reversal of Miranda requires states to step up on policing
While all eyes are focused on the recently leaked draft of the Supreme Court opinion on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which would end constitutional protections for aborti…
1:48 PM · Jun 15, 2022

https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/3517724-expected-reversal-of-miranda-requires-states-to-step-up-on-policing/

While all eyes are focused on the recently leaked draft of the Supreme Court opinion on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which would end constitutional protections for abortion rights, a lesser-known case looks likely to erode another constitutional precedent—Miranda rights.

This case, Vega v. Tekoh, asks whether a person’s federal constitutional rights are violated if a police officer fails to inform them of their rights to remain silent, to be represented by an attorney, and to be protected against self-incrimination whenever the person is subjected to a custodial interrogation by the police. These warnings, known as Miranda warnings after the 1966 Supreme Court case that first prescribed them, have become critical protections against coercive police interrogations and are routinely recited by officers whenever they make arrests or question suspects in custody.

The Supreme Court now seems poised to reverse its decision in Miranda, which, much like Dobbs, would give states—and, to a significant extent, individual towns—the power to decide an important question of policy: whether police should be legally required to give these warnings.

Although some state high courts have issued rulings that mirror the Supreme Court’s original decision in Miranda, the future of constitutional policing in a world where Miranda is overruled truly lies with state legislatures, who can decide to enact laws that mirror the original Mirandadecisionor vote to overrule any state high court that already does so, freeing themselves to reshape one of policing’s most central restrictions.

*snip*

[Ferrets are Cool]

1. JFC, this is the first I've heard of this.

This court has lost it's fucking mind.

[AllaN01Bear]

2. stupid suprime court. i thought it said in the constitution that we have right to a lawyer .

some one please correct me if im wrong . thanks .

[Walleye]

3. That is just plain stupid. The Miranda warnings have become standard operating police procedure

Nobody is complaining about it. The police I have read actually like it. It lets the suspect know where he stands. That Miranda warning gets peoples attention. Now I wonder what they plan on fucking over next. Title nine maybe

[AllaN01Bear]

4. rule by precident . here is your lying activeist judges people .

[yorkster]

5. Did Miranda rights almost disappear

several years ago or am I misremembering?
I recall some kerfuffle about Miranda, though it may not have gotten as fast as USSC.

[Ocelot II]

9. The rights won't disappear; overturning Miranda would just mean

that they don't have to tell you about them.

[yorkster]

11. Ah, so in legalese "real sneaky-like".

Thx for the elucidation.

[Hassler]

6. This has been one of the goals for the past 50 years, along with Roe

And Brown v Bd.

[Comfortably_Numb]

7. I wonder if Brown v Board of Eduction is also in peril. With these fucknugget

fascist justices I wouldn’t be surprised. Oh, and thank Odin the the government that Ginni Shitbird tried to overthrow is now compelled to protect her. How fucked up is that? To hell with that traitor and her worthless, idiot husband….

[Ocelot II]

8. Jesus! What's next?

Maybe they'll reinstate Dred Scott, ffs.

[qazplm135]

10. hold up

The case isn't about Miranda in a criminal context, it's about Miranda in a civil lawsuit.

As in, you failed to give me my Miranda rights, I was acquitted, now I am suiing you under a federal action.

I don't see ANYTHING in there that whiffs at Miranda being overruled in a criminal context, and it's certainly not the basis of the case.

[Crepuscular]

12. ...

You are exactly right, thanks for pointing that out, the case in question is about whether police can be sued in civil court for failing to mirandize a suspect. That does not mean that evidence gathered without being properly mirandized can be used in a criminal prosecution, it would still be excluded if the suspect was not made aware of their rights regarding self incrimination. They just can't sue a cop for failure to do so. The media really needs to do a better job of explaining the impact of these decisions.

[HAB911]

13. FFS