Today's Date: March 29, 2024
Re:wild and Colossal Biosciences team up to leverage revolutionary technology to save critically endangered species on the brink   •   Fosun Management on 2023 Annual Results: Focusing on Core Industries with Established Advantages   •   Anaergia Announces Escrow Closing of Second Tranche of the Strategic Investment   •   Visit Visalia Recognizes Autism Awareness Month in April   •   YMCA of the USA Partners With Old Spice To Increase High School Graduation Among Boys And Young Men Of Color Through Mentorship   •   National University Receives 2024 Military Friendly® Gold Designation   •   Jamieson Wellness Publishes Inaugural Sustainability Impact Report   •   Parkland Corporation Announces the Results of the 2024 Annual General Meeting of Shareholders   •   VIRGIN HOTELS CHAMPIONS INCLUSIVE TRAVEL FOR NEURODIVERSE TRAVELERS   •   Chosgo K23: One of the Best Bluetooth Hearing Aids for Seniors   •   Anaergia Announces Delay in the Filing of Its Audited Financial Statements and Related Disclosures   •   Empire State Realty Trust Receives WELL Health-Safety Leadership Award; Becomes Among the First Commercial Office and Multifamil   •   Carnegie Learning Named 2024 SIIA CODiE Award Finalist for Best Educational Game and Best AI Implementation in Ed Tech   •   Coachella Concerned That People Have Sex, Says AHF   •   e.l.f. Cosmetics Debuts TikTok Shop Super Brand Day   •   Amerex Group Unveils Red Carter Swimwear's Revitalized Collection   •   Midea Group releases its first-ever ESG brand story with an unexpected VIP visit highlighting its commitment to sustainability.   •   Equalpride Partners with TransLash Media for Trans Day of Visibility, Amplifying Voices of Black Trans Femmes in the Arts   •   Sypher Secures Strategic Partnership with FAIA to Fuel Growth   •   Make-A-Wish and celebrity wish granters announce goal to recruit 1 million people to become "WishMakers"
Bookmark and Share

Supreme Court Restricts Miranda Rights

 

 Posted by Gary Redding, civilrights.org

In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court dramatically reinterpreted its landmark Miranda decision by requiring criminal suspects to invoke their right to remain silent with a clear, explicit statement.

According to the Court, remaining silent or failing to cooperate, even during a long interrogation session, are no longer enough to stop any further questioning by law enforcement officials.

Berghuis, Warden v. Thompkins involved the case of Van Chester Thompkins, who was arrested and charged with first-degree murder, read his Miranda rights, and given an acknowledgement form that he refused to sign.  After remaining silent for close to three hours, an officer asked, "Do you believe in God?" and "Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?" Thompkins answered "Yes" to both questions.  Thompkins was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole based on his monosyllabic responses.

Thompkins filed suit, alleging that his Miranda rights had been violated.  Under the Court's decision, Thompkins' answer to the officer's question about religion constituted a waiver of his Miranda rights, even though he was silent for most of the interrogation.  

"A suspect who has received and understood the Miranda warnings, and has not invoked his Miranda rights, waives the right to remain silent by making an uncoerced statement to police," said Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority.

In a strongly worded dissent, which was joined by Justices Steven Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the newest justice on the Court, wrote:

"Today's decision turns Miranda upside down. Criminal suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent—which, counter intuitively, requires them to speak. At the same time, suspects will be legally presumed to have waived their rights even if they have given no clear expression of their intent to do so. Those results, in my view, find no basis in Miranda or our subsequent cases and are inconsistent with the fair-trial principles on which those precedents are grounded."

Criminal law professors on both left and right were critical of the opinion.  Civil rights groups said that the Court's decision is yet another example of how the Roberts Court is failing to take into account the effects of the law on ordinary people. 

On its blog yesterday, People For the American Way said:

"It's a perfect example of how the Roberts majority, while displaying remarkable ambivalence to the practical implications of its rulings, isn't just calling "balls and strikes"—it's going to bat for its own unprecedented agenda." 

Categories: Criminal Justice SystemJudiciary

 



Back to top
| Back to home page
Video

White House Live Stream
LIVE VIDEO EVERY SATURDAY
alsharpton Rev. Al Sharpton
9 to 11 am EST
jjackson Rev. Jesse Jackson
10 to noon CST


Video

LIVE BROADCASTS
Sounds Make the News ®
WAOK-Urban
Atlanta - WAOK-Urban
KPFA-Progressive
Berkley / San Francisco - KPFA-Progressive
WVON-Urban
Chicago - WVON-Urban
KJLH - Urban
Los Angeles - KJLH - Urban
WKDM-Mandarin Chinese
New York - WKDM-Mandarin Chinese
WADO-Spanish
New York - WADO-Spanish
WBAI - Progressive
New York - WBAI - Progressive
WOL-Urban
Washington - WOL-Urban

Listen to United Natiosns News