The Supreme Court handed down a ruling yesterday intended to clarify Miranda protections for those accused of crimes. Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy said that even after hours of silence during questioning, a Michigan man had not invoked his right to silence, and a one-word answer was an admissible statement. Justice Sotomayor dissented, writing, the decision “turns Miranda upside down.” Does the ruling protect criminal suspects? Does it grant excessive influence to law enforcement? Will police interrogation tactics change?
Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, University of California, Irvine School of Law
Kent Scheidegger, legal director and general counsel for the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. The Criminal Justice Legal Foundation introduced a friend of the court brief, arguing that the Michigan appeals court decision to uphold Thompkins’ conviction was reasonable.