Miranda's Fourfold Failure

Abstract

The Boston University Law Review held a symposium on Miranda v. Arizona fifty years after that decision. This contribution to the symposium argues that Miranda has been:

(1) A Doctrinal Failure (a) because Miranda seriously misconstrued the Fifth Amendment’s privilege against self-incrimination; (b) because the artificiality of Miranda’s rules has produced a mountain of nonsense law; and (c) because Miranda promised legal assistance at the stationhouse while ensuring that suspects would not get it;

(2) An Ethical Failure (a) because the extravagant right to remain silent asserted by Miranda runs counter to ordinary moral principles; and (b) because the unwillingness of just about everyone actually to honor this right has produced a system relying on exploitation and deception;

(3) A Jurisprudential Failure because Miranda departed from the appropriate role of courts; and

(4) An Empirical Failure because Miranda did next to nothing to protect suspects from police abuse.