Effects of Supreme Court Decisions on Law Enforcement in the US

Criminal Procedure
Student Name
University name

Criminal Procedure
Introduction
America in the starting of 1950s had become a country obsessed with social changes
and freedom. The Warren Court at the same time mirrored the following developments. The
Burger built run those courts and carried out the developments in an appropriate manner. The
courts of Burger and Warren believed in a new concept that the constitution was a living and
breathing document which means it adapts with changing environment. The court of
Rehnquist was being formed. The court presents the idea that the constitution is when it was
formed was not only relevant but it is also present in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries
(Baum, 2013).
Main Context
Effects of the decisions of Supreme Court on law enforcement in the United States
A great deal was being accomplished by the Chief Justice Earl Warren before he was
being appointed finally as the Chief Justice. Warren was being elected as the governor of
California and he did his job for three consecutive terms. He was also Attorney General and
District Attorney of California in his early years. He earned a reputation that he takes very
harsh decisions in the criminal cases. Dwight D. Eisenhower, the president appointed the
Chief Justice Earl Warren after Earl Warren in 1953. However, Earl Warren had carried
significant cases which imposed a significant impact on the community and criminal justice
(Belknap & Warren, 2005).
The Brown v. Board of Education was depicted to the landmark decision made by the
Supreme Court of United States. The case depicted that the state rules are establishing public
schools separately for the white and black students. The decision inverted the decision of
Plessey v. Ferguson of 1896 in which segregation of state-sponsored was allowed. The
unanimous decision of Warren Court explained that the separate educations for students are
considered to be inherently unequal. The racial segregation, as a result, ruled the violation or
breach of the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution of the United States. The ruling
provided a path for the civil rights movement (Bell-Rehwoldt, 2005). A question was raised
whether the constitution provided the power to court for giving orders.
Warren explained his argument to his colleagues that he believed that the racial
segregation has to violate the constitution. But he did not insist on a vote. He just spoke to the
1

Criminal Procedure
justice and motivates them to discuss with each other as he created a common place where all
could stand. He got eight votes and it made Stanley Reed of Kentucky join the rest. A basic
view in Brown V. Board Education was created by Warren and it kept moving and reviewing
till he had an opinion by every member of the court. Warren got help to desegregate the
school, and it was mostly from President Richard M Nixon (Collins, 2013). During the time
when Warren was chief, he successfully kept all the decisions regarding segregation
unanimous. Brown submitted a requested for school and very soon the court expands the
concept to all other states by making a low against racial classification in many areas.
Congress sanctions the process in the Civil Right Act of 1964 and in the voting right act of
1965. Warren felt that he and his racial segregation was wrong. This decision will remain as a
landmark decision; Warren was against the equal protection clause which refers to
reservation for the minority children.
Miranda V. Arizona decision was a landmark decision for the United States of
America. As per this law, the court has mentioned that both inculpatory and exculpatory
statement which has given in repose to the interrogation by a defendant in police custody will
be acceptable in the trail. The prosecution has to show that the defendant was aware of the
right to discuss with an attorney during or before the questioning and of the right to self-
incrimination before investigating by police (Domingo, 2011). And it must be understood by
the defendant and agreed on it. The Miranda Warning has made a significant impact on low
enforcement of the United States. A formal warning is known as a Miranda Warning which
must be given to the suspect by the police before starting the interrogation. The purpose of
this warning is to make sure that accused is aware and reminded of his/her rights and the
accused must know that he/she can invoke at any point of time during the investigation. The
Miranda Warning has to be understood by the accused before starting the interrogation. If the
suspect tells something related to the case before reading the warning the information can be
considered valid because the interrogation was not started by that time (Schwartz, 1998).
Gideon V. Wainwright case left a deep mark in the history of United State Supreme
Court. According to this low and under the Sixth Amendment of the constitution the Supreme
Court has granted an attorney for the defence to those people who cannot afford a private
attorney. This amendment has made a huge impact on law enforcement (Espejo, 2009). As
per the Supreme Court's decision, in all capital cases, a council must be provided to all.
Gideon V. Wainwright has helped those people who are not financially strong enough to get
2