American Opinion: Here’s another crucial constitutional right that the US Supreme Court is shredding

Summary: As the dissent argued, it’s not clear what will compel police to inform suspects of their rights during interrogation if they can’t be held accountable for ignoring the requirement. Rights do not enforce themselves.

The U.S. Supreme Court building as seen on Sunday, July 11, 2021 in Washington, D.C.
The U.S. Supreme Court building as seen on Sunday, July 11, 2021 in Washington, D.C.
(Daniel Slim/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)
We are part of The Trust Project.

American Opinion
American Opinion
Recent American Opinion editorials.
The Justice Department should ask Cannon to recuse herself, and if she refuses, it should appeal for reassignment of the case.
From the editorial: The right to marry whom you love should not be subject to the whims of an out-of-step conservative court or be left to a patchwork of state regulations. Congress must make the Respect for Marriage Act the law of the land.
From American Opinion editorial: Enter the Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force, a nationwide effort that’s being made to investigate and take legal action against companies who bring foreign robocalls into the United States. The coalition includes attorneys general from all 50 states.

Lost in the furor over the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the nearly five decades of American bodily autonomy guaranteed by Roe v. Wade was another appalling ruling in Vega v. Tekoh. It undermined the landmark 56-year-old precedent that established what have come to be known as Miranda rights.

In a decision that fell along the same ideological lines as the one that overturned Roe, the court ruled that suspects who are not informed of their constitutional right to remain silent under police questioning cannot sue law enforcement or other government officials for damages.

The decision guts the 1966 ruling in Miranda v. Arizona. If police are not compelled to read Miranda warnings by the threat of lawsuits, then there is no impetus for them to do so.

The court was ruling on the case of Terence Tekoh, who was arrested by Los Angeles Sheriff’s Deputy Carlos Vega in 2014 for the sexual assault of a patient at the hospital where Tekoh worked. Under interrogation, Tekoh confessed to the crime. But Vega had failed to announce his Miranda rights at the time of arrest, opening the door for Tekoh to sue the department for violating his constitutional rights.


Tekoh was ultimately acquitted even though his confession was presented at trial. His lawyers argued that Vega refused to accept Tekoh’s profession of innocence and had “a hand resting on his firearm” during the suspect’s interrogation. They also argued that the deputy threatened to report Tekoh, a legal U.S. resident, to immigration officials, which could have meant deportation to, and persecution in, Cameroon.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority that while Miranda rights have “roots” in the Constitution, “a violation of Miranda does not necessarily constitute a violation of the Constitution.” The justice wrote that statements obtained without a Miranda warning should be suppressed at trial, but he argued that “Allowing the victim of a Miranda violation to sue a police officer for damages ... would have little additional deterrent value, and permitting such claims would cause many problems.”

But Justice Elena Kagan wrote in dissent that the ruling “strips individuals of the ability to seek a remedy for violations of the right recognized in Miranda. The majority observes that defendants may still seek ‘the suppression at trial of statements obtained’ in violation of Miranda’s procedures. But sometimes, such a statement will not be suppressed.” In such cases, the justice asked, what remedy will defendants have for wrongful convictions and other harms at the hands of police who don’t inform them of their rights?

Given that the court previously found Miranda warnings “necessary to safeguard the personal protections of the Fifth Amendment,” Kagan asked, why shouldn’t the reading of rights be enforceable?

More opinion content
Recent opinion content published in the West Central Tribune.
From the commentary: The 2024 campaign is already very different from 2016, and it’s likely to become even more so.
From the commentary: The real problem is that too many Americans have come to rely on the government for what it was never created to do and less on themselves.
From the editorial: "'Spend it all and then tax more' is precisely where things seem to be heading in St. Paul this session."
From the editorial: We have all the tools we need to fight this existential threat and we now know that taking decisive action can get results. We can’t wait a moment longer to act.
Editorial cartoonist Dave Granlund draws on the current Arctic cold blast in west central Minnesota.
An editorial cartoon by Dave Granlund.
From the commentary: So California, if you're planning to settle up with other groups, you should at least acknowledge that Mexican Americans also have a claim — even if we don't pursue it.
"If we are unwilling to admit that the racism exists in our power structures, people of color will continue to pay a deadly price."
From the editorial: Expulsion or impeachment are exceedingly rare. But Speaker Kevin McCarthy should make clear they are on the table if Rep. Santos refuses to resign.
Editorial cartoonist Dave Granlund draws on the ground hog's Super Bowl prediction.

Most people’s experience of Miranda rights comes from watching police procedurals on television, which often get the basic facts of the law right: Those taken into police custody must be advised of their Fifth Amendment protection from self-incrimination, such as during interrogation.

As the dissent argued, it’s not clear what will compel police to inform suspects of their rights during interrogation if they can’t be held accountable for ignoring the requirement. Rights do not enforce themselves.

This American Opinion editorial is the opinion of the editorial board of the Sacramento Bee.


©2022 The Sacramento Bee. Visit at Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.


This story was written by one of our partner news agencies. Forum Communications Company uses content from agencies such as Reuters, Kaiser Health News, Tribune News Service and others to provide a wider range of news to our readers. Learn more about the news services FCC uses here.

What To Read Next
From the editorial: (Business) know that society has become more inclusive and tolerant in recent years. That’s what puts such a bitter taste in Tucker Carlson’s mouth.
From the editorial: No law can stop every crime, as California’s mass shooting tragically confirms. But the data consistently shows that sane gun restrictions make society safer overall.
From the editorial: If McCarthy and other House leaders aren’t willing to endorse an increase, Biden must appeal to responsible Republicans in the House.
From the editorial: "There’s a lack of political checks and balances in Minnesota right now that’s far from ideal."