Comparison Of Chief Of Justice Of Miranda V Arizona And Other Cases

In this essay I will be comparing and contrasting both Chief Justice Earl Warren and Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Discussing both gentlemen’s approaches to the criminal procedure will be compared and contrasted. The focus of this essay is discussing the significant decisions and effects that they had made. Also, a little bit of background information of them that some of us may not have known. 

Earl Warren was the chief of justice for sixteen years, from 1953 to 1969. Warren was wat we call a self made gentlemen who had transformed his judicial system during a tumultuous time for the American politics. Earl Warren had an interest in becoming a lawyer but had a fear of public speaking and one day he had decided to take the opportunity that would help overcome his fear. Warren had a chance to be acquainted to a district attorney and having done this it definitely had helped him with not only with his public speaking fear but along with being exposed to the tumultuous realm of political turnings. Now during Warrens time here was a major decision that he had out lawed, such as racial segregation within public schools and there was a requirement that there be equal apportionment of the state legislatures. Also, the House of representatives set a strict national standard to protect the rights of criminal defendants and ruled that the bibles and prayers were unconstitutional. There is a real big case that had happened in United States history called Gideon v. Wainwright. In this case the Supreme Court had ruled that the state courts are required under the sixth amendment of the constitution, that they are to provide a counsel in criminal cases for defendants, who are unable to afford an attorney. This was a major impact then and is still a huge impact till this day in law enforcement. Having an attorney present can make law enforcements jobs a lot more difficult. There was an issue in the supreme court of the same problem in the case Powell v. Alabama and the supreme court’s decision was they had ordered that the council needs to provide in all capital cases. In the case of Gideon v. Wainwright it had expanded the people’s right to everyone in every case and that it is difficult to determine whether the policy had a positive or negative impact on the criminal justice system. This was a big step towards civil liberties and also a step back from social order.

In another case that was a part of Chief Justice Warrens time was Miranda v. Arizona. In this case the court had held that statements that were made in response to the interrogation by the defendant who was informed of their right to consult with an attorney, before, during questioning and that they have the right against self-incrimination prior to police. In this particular case the defendant had understood their rights but had also waved their rights and this had an impact on law enforcement because this is called a Miranda Warning. Now this is a part of the police routine to make sure that suspects were informed of their rights. A Miranda Warning is a formal name of the warning that is required to be said or given by police to criminal suspects that are in police custody, before they are interrogated. The purpose of this is to make sure that those who are being accused of anything of anything are aware of their rights. Now the rights under the United States Constitution and that they know they can at anytime revoke them and that includes during their interview. Maranda Warnings are to be read or said to a person before a person starts getting questioned, but if a person says anything before being read their Miranda Warnings now what they said can be used against them. This is a really big impact in the criminal justice system because I am almost certain that there has been plenty of people that have gone free because the arresting officer did not read them their Mirandize Warning. Now this was a big step towards civil liberties and one step away from social order. Earl Warren was very big on police officers being held accountable for their actions and doing what they are supposed to be doing, or in other wards treating people equally.

William was a very successful man and is remembered to be one of the most successful Chief of Justices in the Supreme Court by many people. William had grown up in a Republican home / Family house hold and he had even served in the United States Army Air Force after high school. William had when to Santford University and had worked very hard to get his bachelor’s degree in political science. After getting his degree he had still continued to study at Santford and eventually had gotten his master’s in political science. But William had soon decided that he wanted to get a degree in law and was top of his graduating class. The William had become Chief Justice on September of 1986 and was swarm in by President Ronald Regan himself. William had worked hard to get to where he was and could not stress his favorite formation of federalism that emphasized the ten amendments. William was a very firm believed that in the United States the rights and sought to limit federal control and especially when it came to the fourteenth amendment. One really big case and is a very well known one is the Roe v. Wade case. But this case will not be discussed instead we are going to talk about the Romer v. Evans, Bower v. Hardwick and Lawrence v. Texas cases.

First, from what was gathered is William was not for gay rights because he has stated that in the United States Constitution it did not mention anything on how to handle gay rights. It was left for the states to decide what gay rights were or are. So in the case Romer v. Evans there was an amendment to the state of Colorado constitution and Amendment two there would need to be prevention on any city, town or country in the state from taking any legislative, executive and judicial action from recognizing any person who was gay or lesbian citizen as a protected class. This was passed by the Colorado citizens in a vote and the legislative of Colorado had mentioned a previous case that was very similar and that case was Bower v. Hardwick of 1986. Now in this case the supreme court had ruled that having laws that made homosexual activity illegal was very constitutional. They had claimed that if it was rational to make acts illegal then surly it was rational to not provide special protection to such acts. The Supreme court had ruled that Colorado’s law on homosexual citizens was unconstitutional and later in 2003 there was another supreme court case that fell under William. The case of Lawrence v. Texas, it had a major impact in the United States because the court had struck down on the sodomy law in Texas and the court had previously addressed the almost the same situation back in 1986 in the case of Bowers v. Hardwick. In the case being discussed Lawrence had over ruled Bower in the case because it had viewed the liberty interest too narrowly. The majority held that consensual sex was a part of the liberty protection by substantive due process under the fourteenth amendment and Lawrence had the effect of involving similar laws throughout the United States that had criminalized sodomy between two adults of the same sex, in a privet setting, consenting to sex.

In conclusion, both Chief of Justices seem to be had been part of many very well known cases. As well as known a little bit about how they because to both be Chief Justices. Earl Warren was a republican who looks like he had changed sides once he had become Chief of Justice. But it does look like he had made many decisions in a way a republican would have not. Now for Chief of Justice William Rehnquist was a republican who had supported state rights and had attempted to restrain the government’s power. These two gentlemen are on opposite sides of the spectrum, but small story short both men were very successful and had both accomplished great things. In my opinion Chief Warren was just a bit more successful in my eyes because he was good at manipulating other members of the court to side with him. Both men did there hardest and worked very hard to get where they were.