- The conservative decision by a 6-3 majority concluded that failing to read someone’s Miranda warning does not allow law enforcement to be sued for violating someone’s civil rights.
- The decision offers a major avenue to incentivize police to issue Miranda warnings and ensure their accountability.
- People must say clearly and affirm to the police that “I want my attorney and I want to remain silent,” and then remain silent, civil rights experts said.
The magic words begin Miranda’s Warning what many people know by heart – “you have the right to remain silent” – can be preserved in Hollywood shows and movies, but Thursday Decision of the Supreme Court meaning of it protect civil rights will be significantly reduced, legal experts told USA TODAY.
Decision 6-3with the dissent of three liberal justices of the court, in Vega v. Tekoh, essentially concluding that not “Mirandize” or issue a Miranda warning to someone, does not allow a person to sue federal civil rights law enforcement agency for Fifth Amendment protection against forced self-incrimination.