Some justices’ recent concerns about the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court in the public’s eyes surfaced again Wednesday in the unusual context of arguments involving the nearly six-decade-old landmark Miranda decision.

In Vega v. Tekoh, Justice Elena Kagan told Latham & Watkins partner Roman Martinez, counsel to police officer Carlos Vega, that, if the court ruled for Vega, the decision would be seen by the public as inconsistent with the justices’ 2000 decision in United States v. Dickerson. A 7-2 court , led by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, held in Dickerson that Miranda had announced a constitutional rule that Congress could not overturn by statute, a rule that is “constitutionally based.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]