What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

SCOTUS, Now with KBJ

Status
Not open for further replies.
ScoobyDoo said:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1539977741499498496

Appears Miranda was overturned.
Click to expand...

No, it wasn't. Miranda remains a staple of criminal law and a violation still precludes the gathered evidence from being used against you in a criminal trial just as it did yesterday. This was whether you could sue a cop civilly for violating it, simply for violating it and absent anything more.

I would've sided with the liberals, but this isn't the death knell of Miranda (even if Alito's disdain for Miranda showed through in spades).
 
Last edited:
unofan said:
No, it wasn't. Miranda remains a staple of criminal law and a violation still precludes the gathered evidence from being used against you. This was whether you could sue a cop civilly for violating it, simply for violating it and absent anything more.

I would've sided with the liberals, but this isn't the death knell of Miranda (even if Alito's disdain for Miranda showed through in spades).
Click to expand...

Not being able to sue the cop means that they will skirt things even more. Accountability of law enforcement in this country is at all time lows and this lowers the bar considerably. Again, what it signals to me is to start praying that I never need the criminal justice system for anything before I die.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
This puts it better than I ever could.
Click to expand...

Never mind that it's wrong.

1) you already couldn't do anything about it directly because in virtually every state, it's illegal to resist cops, even when they're performing an otherwise illegal act. This doesn't change that.
2) A coerced confession can't be used against you in a resulting criminal trial. This doesn't change that.
3) Being beaten/punched has nothing to do with being read your Miranda rights. This doesn't change that.
4) You can sue cops for excessive force under 1983. This doesn't change that.
 
unofan said:
Never mind that it's wrong.

1) you already couldn't do anything about it directly because in virtually every state, it's illegal to resist cops, even when they're performing an otherwise illegal act. This doesn't change that.
2) A coerced confession can't be used against you in a resulting criminal trial. This doesn't change that.
3) Being beaten/punched has nothing to do with being read your Miranda rights. This doesn't change that.
4) You can sue cops for excessive force under 1983. This doesn't change that.
Click to expand...

Yep. In a vacuum that's all true. Until it isn't. Good luck with your excessive force lawsuit by the way.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1539977741499498496

Appears Miranda was overturned. Sounds good. Seems like I need to start praying for a couple of things for my family.

1. Please, never encounter a gun in public. Especially one that is fired.
2. Never ever ever have to interact with the police for whatever reason. I'm not even black and I don't want anything to do with them.

And all I have to say on all this is, but her emails.
Click to expand...


uno already debunked that. The press needs to stop overinflating it. Miranda has not been overturned.
 
Basically at this point anything that gives anybody less rights than they have now is suspicious to me.
 
Last edited:
What's the bigger danger to public safety and the safety of law enforcement: a few folks (who are not taken seriously) demanding "defund the police" ...or SCOTUS?
 
unofan said:
Good for her. She's still wrong. The remedy provided in Miranda itself is exclusion of evidence.

One can think this was wrongly decided and side with the dissenters without exaggerating and claiming that Miranda is dead, because it's not.
Click to expand...

Further, the guy was acquitted in his criminal trial despite the admission of his confession. That's the definition of harmless error, since he won.
 
unofan said:
Further, the guy was acquitted in his criminal trial despite the admission of his confession. That's the definition of harmless error, since he won.
Click to expand...

So here's the question I have. SCOTUS said today you can't sue the cop for civil damages. Can you sue the government?
 
dxmnkd316 said:
So here's the question I have. SCOTUS said today you can't sue the cop for civil damages. Can you sue the government?
Click to expand...

Generally not federally. Presumably all states (and by extension, any political subdivisions thereof) would assert sovereign immunity from a civil suit in federal court (mine absolutely would). To get around that you have to sue an individual under 1983, hence why you have to sue the cop, or the governor, or whatever if you're seeking civil damages from a state actor in federal court.

For state courts, it'd depend on state law and whether they've waived sovereign immunity for such claims.
 
Which is why we should have civil recourse against the state or cop, even if through other means not specifically through Miranda.

if the state can't be sued, why not violate the rights every time? If you've got a shaky case you might as well. Worst case, you lose an already low % case.

The state should have a disincentive for abusing rights, especially in the cases where they're not on firm ground and have nothing to lose, which is where they're most likely to do it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top