“But in another case, the Supremes hold that a Miranda violation does not give grounds for a Sec. 1983 lawsuit for deprivation of civil rights.”
This is a very narrow decision that relies on the fact the Miranda rules are not, in fact, laws but judicial rulings and are not absolute, as is The Fifth Amendment. I’m not sure about the line between de jure and de facto, but the Supreme Court decided that in this case.
“A §1983 claim may also be based on “the deprivation of any rights . . . secured by the . . . laws.”
But the argument that Miranda rules constitute federal “law” that can provide the ground for a §1983 claim cannot succeed unless Tekoh can persuade the Court that this “law” should be expanded to include the right to sue for damages under §1983.
“A judicially crafted” prophylactic rule should apply “only
where its benefits outweigh its costs,” Shatzer.”
Clarence Thomas turns the tables and calls gun control racist.
The man is a rare American treasure. pic.twitter.com/ytRWuDxO9S— John Cardillo (@johncardillo) June 23, 2022