GoldbergBlog

Supreme Court Once Again Invokes Right to Remain Stupid

In a 5-4 decision (surprise, surprise), the Supreme Court rules that a suspect must invoke his right to remain silent just as a suspect must invoke his right to an attorney.  Of course, this poses two problems:

1.) Suspects will have no way of knowing that they’re the ones who must actively say (ironic, I know) that they wish to remain silent.  Does this mean that when a suspect is read their Miranda rights, an officer must state, “You have the right to claim silence,”?

2.) Rights, by virtue of being rights, do not always need to be actively invoked.  When someone criticizes the government, they do not first proclaim “I will now exercise my 1st amendment right of freedom of speech.”  Rights pertaining to the actions of the individual are granted rather than announced.  Requesting an attorney must be announced because it requires a second party.

I’m not a lawyer.  But I do know that this is yet another example of conservative-dominated court that has fundamentally changed yet another aspect of American life.  Earlier this year, there was debate over how long interrogators could go without reading the Times Square bomber his Miranda rights.  Now the Supreme Court has added the question of when those rights are read, will the suspect be aware of this major (and counter-intuitive) caveat?

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.