This Day in Liberal Judicial Activism—January 15


2021—A Ninth Circuit panel rules (in Tekoh v. County of Los Angeles) that when prosecutors have used a defendant’s un-Mirandized statement (i.e., a statement given by a suspect before receiving Miranda warnings) to prove a criminal charge against him, that defendant may pursue a damages action under section 1983 against the officer who took the statement. Never mind that Chief Justice Rehnquist’s baffling opinion in Dickerson v. United States (2000), which declined to overrule Miranda v. Arizona (1966), avoided declaring that the use at trial of a voluntary but un-Mirandized statement violates the Constitution.

Some months later, seven Ninth Circuit judges will dissent from the court’s refusal to rehear the matter en banc.

Articles You May Like

School board backlash is catalyst for reawakening American freedoms: Jordan
REPORT: A Year Into His Term, Biden Backers Are Not Happy
Suspect who allegedly gunned down 19-year-old Burger King worker in cold blood demands reparations
Chuck Schumer’s Case for Keeping the Filibuster
Hundreds of Chicago students orchestrate school walkout and crowded protest to demand safer COVID-19 conditions, relief stipends, and laptops

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *