Monday, October 21, 2013
Megan Fairlie (Florida International University (FIU) - College of Law) has posted Miranda and its (More Rights-Protective) International Counterparts (20 U.C Davis Journal of International Law & Policy (2013, Forthcoming)) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Given that Miranda’s warnings are nearly identically reproduced in international criminal procedure, logic suggests that the rights of questioned suspects are equally valuable — and equally valued — in both realms. But history has its own logic, and Miranda’s history in the United States includes a steady erosion of its ability to safeguard the rights of suspects. This is particularly true with respect to the limitations placed on Miranda’s custodial trigger and the lessening of the requirements for an effective waiver. Recent efforts to eviscerate Miranda through these two channels, including Berghuis v. Thompkins (2010) and Howes v. Fields (2012), provide a stark contrast to the more rights-protective dictates of international criminal justice. As a result, “international Miranda” is now more faithful to both the text and intent of the Miranda opinion than current domestic practice.