Not allowing a wife to testify for or against her husband dates back to the Middle Ages, when wives were the property of their husbands.
Not the right kind of conservative...
>Spousal privilege is a protection of individual liberty against the overwhelming power of the government. Your theory is wrong, because husbands cannot be forced to protect their wives either.
So it is not about property, regardless of what the practice was in the Middle Ages.
I think the issue is hear-say, not spousal immunity. As a conservative, I would be upset if the court had upheld the convict, based on the facts in the story. The right to confront one’s accusers is one of our bedrock constituitional protections.
A wife may not be forced to testify against her husband, but it is not against the law for one to do it voluntarily.
She refused to directly testify, but her confessions were a seperate issue as they were offered freely by her.
The Supreme Court of Texas just made a horrible decision... Perhaps they’ll feel better if its their kids who wind up victims.
Unfathonable that this decision was handed down, let alone that it got 5 votes for it.