The Supreme Court continues to deliver important rulings. Today, they issued a decision on a case addressing “Miranda rights.”
For years, police have been required to recite these rights to someone as they are arrested. But if they fail to do so, lawyers have used that fact to claim criminals’ rights were violated.
But the Supreme Court issued a decision that stands up for police while protecting everyone’s rights.
From the Los Angeles Times:
The Supreme Court on Thursday shielded police from being sued by suspects for failing to provide well-known Miranda warnings…
The court’s conservative majority described the Miranda warnings as a set of guidelines that protect the right against self-incrimination. As such, the warnings, including the “right to remain silent,” are not constitutional rights in themselves that could result in a separate action against the police.
In a 6-3 ruling, the court decided that if a police officer fails to recite the “Miranda rights,” a criminal cannot sue or claim their rights were violated.
The court decided that should an officer not provide those warnings, it simply means a suspect’s “incriminating comments” cannot be used in court.
Seems like a fair compromise.
The court ruled that the warnings themselves, known as “Miranda rights” simply inform a suspect of their right against self-incrimination.
The warnings are not “constitutional rights.” And because of this, criminals cannot claim an officer violated their rights for not reciting them.
This is a big step in protecting police officers in the line of duty. Certain circumstances might prevent a cop from reciting the Miranda rights.
That doesn’t mean the officer should be sued by someone who is being arrested.
It appears lawyers and criminal activists have exploited this situation for years, to punish cops.
This decision flies in the face of the left’s ongoing anti-cop agenda. In the wake of the “defund movement” and other radical “criminal reform,” the SCOTUS is backing police officers.