Supreme Court Hears Case on Whether Miranda Warning Is a Right

 

The Supreme Court is considering whether the well-known case of Miranda v. Arizona created a constitutional right or something less. That case held that the police were required to give certain warnings to a suspect in custody before interrogation. In the absence of such warnings (the right to remain silent among them), any admission obtained from a suspect would be inadmissible at trial.

The conservative justices seem to be toying with the notion that Miranda established a constitutional rule, not a constitutional right. That is a distinction without a difference. It simply defies common sense and sound legal construction to suggest that a procedure required by the Constitution does not confer a constitutional right.

If the court adopts that reasoning, it will put in motion a steady erosion of the protection afforded an accused under the Constitution.