1
Bill of rights
Students Name
University Affiliation
Course Number and Name
Instructor Name
Assignment Due Date
2
Bill of rights
One of the most important Supreme Court decisions relating to the concerns of the Bill of
Rights is perhaps Miranda v Arizona (1966) which related to the Fifth Amendment which
prohibits anyone from being compelled to be a witness against him/her. The case involved
kidnapping and rape suspect by the name of Ernesto Miranda. After a long session of questioning
he was forced to admit to the crimes and his confession formed part of the trial. Miranda was
convicted but his defense claimed that he had been denied his right to be informed thus not being
told the fact that he has right not to give out information which is a right granted by the Fifth and
Sixth Amendments.
I think the most important question of the constitutional law, which was revealed in this
case, is the question of the application of the right against self-incrimination protected by the
Fifth Amendment to police interrogations. Namely, the Court was given the question of
admissibility of confessions in court if they were given without the accused’s Right being
explained to him/her.
The Supreme Court has in its decision declared that confessional statements which are
given during police interrogations are inadmissible especially where the suspect has not been
enlightened on his/her rights (Alerasoul et al., 2022). This produced what is now referred to as
‘Miranda rights’ whereby anyone under police custody must be made to understand that they
have the right not to incriminate themselves, they have the right to an attorney and that they are
saying can be used against them in a court of law.
Thus, the Court stated that if suspects are not informed of these rights, the inherently
compelling nature of police interrogation can result to a violation of the Fifth Amendment. In the
majority opinion by Chief Justice Earl Warren the decisions were underlined as the protection of
3
the constitutional rights for the people and to guarantee that the justice system was not unfair to
the suspects.
I concur with the Court in its decision as it prevents coerced confessions and a person
understanding his/her rights in the criminal justice process. The police investigations might
compel some individuals into saying something they are not supposed to say without a lawyer to
shield them from doing so. The Miranda decision acts as a tool of check and balance in the war
against law enforcement criminals while protecting the constitutional rights of everyone.
4
Reference
Alerasoul, S. A., Tiberius, V., & Bouncken, R. B. (2022). Entrepreneurship and innovation: The
coevolution of two fields.<Journal of Small Business Strategy,<32(2), 128-151.
