The Approaches to Criminal Procedure by the Supreme Court of the USA - Research Paper Example

?U.S. Supreme Court under both Chief Justices Earl Warren and William Rehnquist College Introduction The Supreme Court is the most significant institution when it comes to matters of decision making. For example, when it comes to criminal justice, the decision issued by the court have impact on the institutions, the actors and whole process concerning justice right from investigations to parole. Criminal case outcomes are attributable to each new chief justice. Clearly, the replacement of chief justice with a newcomer who possesses differing values and policy preferences automatically produce changes in the Supreme Court's decisions. For example, Chief Justice Earl Warren treatment of criminal justice issues was incredibly less conservative than that of Warren Burgers (Smith & Johnson, 1992). His presence on the Supreme Court had an impact. More often changes in the decisions of Supreme Court may be caused by change in an issue or by changes in the behavior of individual justices but membership change is also seen as the most obvious source of change in constitutional law and judicial policy making (Smith & Johnson, 1992). Earl Warren served as Chief Justice between 1953 and 1969 and during his tenure the Supreme Court of the United States was referred to as Warren Courts. During his tenure, Warren led group of justice who were liberal and they used judicial power in unique manner and this led to the protest and dissatisfactions of conservative whom they were the opponents (Fugate, 1997). During Warren’s tenure, civil rights judicial powers and civil rights were dramatically expanded. The court under his leadership brought to an end the racial segregation in the United States and was praised for doing so while others criticized the court for doing so. The court also incorporated the Bill of Rights and brought to an end officially the sanctioned voluntary prayer in public schools. The period is recognized as a high point in judicial power that has receded ever since, but with a substantial continuing impact, members of the Court during the Warren reign included Justices William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, and John Marshall Harlan II (Fugate, 1997). The effects of Warren Court have been felt greatly in the society and are still referenced to this date; it has undoubtedly had long effect on the society. Since that time, there has never been another court that enjoys the powers similar to the ones Warren Court enjoyed. Besides, many of the rulings made at that time are still the same laws being used today. William H. Rehnquist was a conservative and he led what was then a conservative revolution on the Supreme Court he helped lead for 19 years. Chief Justice Rehnquist's lead in the institution was one of the longest in the history of the United States and the consequences were most felt (Belknap & Warren, 2005). William h. Rehnquist was very committed to his work and at no point under his leadership did he relent and he managed to translate most of his personal views and held beliefs into binding precedents. Among these precedents was the one that involved enhanced role of the states within the federal system. Under his leadership, the court accomplished this law that deals with federal system by overturning a number of these laws. Rehnquist made his positions known and everybody knew where he stood and left everybody well aware of his position. His position was made known to the public, especially in 1973 when a court overturned laws that prohibited abortion, in his argument he favored the states power. His writings were also very provocative when he wrote on school segregations and women rights as well as the jobs for the aliens in the civil service. He was also in his writings opposed to the health care for the poor and other proposals that seems to benefit the low in the society. It was a very controversial precedent and had huge impact on social issues (Decker, 1992). Also during his tenure at the court, he seemed to be on his own isolating himself from other judges. His writings were his own opinions and rarely accommodated other people’s views. He provoked and often angered liberals due to his stand on states’ rights as he seemed to agree with discrimination against minorities and women. Rehnquist set precedence that had a lot of social impacts in the society. For example, his majority in 1976 case, Paul v. Davis, upheld that a man who had been wrongly pinpointed as a convicted shoplifter in a flyer circulated by the Louisville, Ky. police department could not take to court the police chief for violating the 14th amendment's guarantee of due process of law (Smith & Johnson, 1992). The man might well have a case for defamation in the Kentucky state courts according to Rehnquist writings, but to allow him to sue under the Constitution in Federal court. In 1989, in the more or less same fashion by majority, DeShaney v. Winnebago County, put off the argument that blame the social worker employed by the state for depriving a young child of his rights by leaving to a father who gave him thorough beatings that sent him to a coma and such child shouldn’t have been left to an abusive father; by leaving the boy to an abusive father, he deprived him of due process (Smith & Johnson, 1992). Rehnquist wrote that the purpose of the due process guarantee is to protect the people from the State and Not State protecting them from each other. He further added: "The Framers were content to leave the extent of governmental obligation in the latter area to the democratic political processes." A 1979 majority opinion, Bell v. Wolfish, upheld that it did not in any way violate the Constitution for prison officials to put two prisoners in a cell made for one. There is not "some sort of one-man, one-cell principle lurking in the due process clause," wrote Justice Rehnquist (Smith & Johnson, 1992). Warren decisions also had great impact on society by setting certain precedence. Warren stood up to the rights provided for in the constitution and even if one is arrested, he is entitled to his rights as provided in the constitution regardless of the magnitude of the offence one has committed. During his tenure, one could not use evidence found during illegal searches to convict a criminal. Police powers were reduced greatly during Warren’s time; they could not arrest anyhow neither could they search individual anyhow. Police power was further reduced because they will no longer have to issue warnings without due considerations of the circumstances. This precedence, though it seems to cuddle criminals and criminal activities, rose by a great margin because criminals felt safe and protected and were motivated to carry on their assault. The right wing was unhappy with his rulings and they protested that they were meant to tie the hands of the police rendering them powerless. They also protested that his rulings were cuddling the perpetrators of crimes whom they should not be treated in such a way Warren ruling seems to favor. Various court cases tried in Warren Court had impacts in rights of Americans. The case was Brown V, Board of Education, Topeka Kansas - 1954 - Civil Rights (Banks, 1992). It was a situation in which a student by the name Linda Brown in the segregated Kansas school district in which every day, Linda walked over 4 miles to school yet there was a white school close to their home. NAACP help then had to be sought after so that Linda Brown could access one of the best schools in the region. He overturned the precedents that were set by earlier courts that seem to discriminate the blacks and other minorities. In his ruling, he put forth that the law is color blind and law doesn’t judge according to color of an individual. Others try to argue that everyone is entitled to equal protection according to the constitution but that did not play to Warren’s gallery. His rulings were seen to be very radical by others while other regarded it to the contrary. His ruling led to the rise of civil right movements across most states in the country. In Katz v. United States - 1961 - Search and Seizure (Wiretaps) case, Katz was arrested for using a public phone to transmit gambling information (Katz v. United States, 1961). What was deemed illegal was gambling. He was arrested after the FBI attached an electronic recording device onto the outside of the public phone booth that Katz used every day. This was argued that this warrant a legal action because they never truly entered the phone booth. The Court, however, ruled in favor of Katz, stating the Fourth Amendment which allowed for the protection of a person and not just a person's property against illegal searches. Whatever a citizen seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected (Decker, 1992). Looking at Warren’s trend, it is very obvious that it was a liberal court keen on protecting the rights and extending them. Earl Warren decisions were essential in understanding the urge for social change in America, more people were active in establishing social laws not necessarily evolving civil rights there starts protest and activism. Therefore, several decisions of the Warren Court gave a sigh of relief of those suspected of crime and those accused because those decisions expanded their constitutional rights. For example, the officers enforcing the law were not supposed to use the evidence acquired illegally to nail down the suspects during criminal proceedings, this was argued that it will guarantee the right to prudent legal assistance for the accused (Decker, 1992). These rulings overruled preceding Court rulings that had made it possible for states to divert stray from strict adherence to federal bill of rights. Warren stacked to federal bill when it comes to safeguarding the accused rights and privileges. In the area of criminal procedure, the Warren Court is understood with four main cases: Mapp v. Ohio (Mapp v. Ohio, 1961) Gideon v. Wainwright (Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963), Miranda v. Arizona (Miranda v. Arizona, 1966), and Terry v. Ohio (Terry v. Ohio, 1968). They were the main focus of Warren detractors, especially on “exclusionary rule” doctrine. In map, the Warren Court set forth for the exclusionary rule to thrive by postulating that "all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is by the Fourth Amendment, inadmissible in a state court (Fugate, 1997)". Rehnquist was extremely unhappy of the Supreme Court's stand in Mapp. Rehnquist served as an assistant attorney general under President Nixon and during that time that he became committed to revising those decisions but couldn’t do so until 1979 when he assumed position as Assistant Attorney General. In that time, he expresses his views in California v. Minjares case (California v. Minjares, 1979) (Belknap & Warren, 2005). In Minjares, Rehnquist wrote a dissent that essentially repeated the views expressed by the dissenters in the Mapp that argued that it was not good to treat defendant in a pleasant manner. Whether Court justices are more liberals or conservatives, the doctrines seem to evolve simultaneously and in a constant manner. Republican Earl Warren realized and used some brilliant reasoning and crossed over the line to the left after becoming Chief Justice which gives leeway for large number of civil rights to be given to the people (Belknap & Warren, 2005). Earl Warren incredibly moved the evolution of the Court doctrines along a bit faster than others would have in his position. He combined his own opinions, morals, values and his own interpretations of the Constitution when delivering a verdict. Some have argued that that is not how the court should work (Fugate, 1997). Warren tenure made America look great in advancing privacy rights as well as civil rights and by doing so, it made America a better place than it was before his tenure. The social settings and perception drastically changed with the emergence of different way of treating criminals which was a kind of coddling them. The society starts seeing things in a different way and perspective and privacy became a thing of great importance. The decision made by the two divides has lasting impacts on the society because they set the precedence for future cases. When writing down the ruling the chief justice should keep in mind that the decision made will have a long lasting impact beyond that moment. References Banks, C. P. (1992). The Supreme Court and Precedent: An Analysis of Natural Courts and Reversal Trends. 75 Judicature 262. Belknap, M. R., & E. Warren. (2005). The Supreme Court under Earl Warren, 1953-1969: Chief Justiceships of the United States Supreme Court Series. Carolina: Univ. of South Carolina Press. Decker, J. F. (1992). Revolution to the Right: Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence During the Burger-Rehnquist Court Era vii. Fugate, R. E. (1997). The Florida constitution: still champion of citizens' rights? Florida State University Law Review. Retrieved on 11/13/2012 from http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/frames/251/fugafram.html Katz v. United States, U.S. (1961). Smith, C. E. & T. R. Hensley. (1993). Assessing the Conservatism of the Rehnquist Court, 77 Judicature 83. (study comparing decision-making during the Warren, Burger, and Rehnquist Court eras). Smith, C. E. & S. P. Johnson. (1992). Newcomer on the High Court: Justice Souter and the Supreme Court's 1990 Term. 37 S.D. L. Rev. 21, 39-41. Read More