Paul G. Cassell

In 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Miranda v. Arizona that people under arrest must be informed of their rights before they can be questioned by the police. On June 26, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in Dickerson v. United States that Miranda should continue to govern whether statements made by defendants during interrogation can be admissible in court. In the following viewpoint, Paul G. Cassell criticizes the court’s decision. He contends that Miranda should have been overturned because of the harm it has caused law enforcement by hampering the ability of police officers to solve crimes. According to Cassell, the court ought to have considered alternatives to Miranda, such as videotaping police questioning. Cassell is a professor of law at the University of Utah and...