What was the Supreme Court concerned about in its ruling in Miranda v. Arizona (1966)?

preventing elected officials from abusing their power

preventing government intrusions in people's private lives

ensuring speedy compliance with its desegregation rulings

protecting people's right not to testify against themselves unwillingly

Question

What was the Supreme Court concerned about in its ruling in Miranda v. Arizona (1966)?

 preventing elected officials from abusing their power

 preventing government intrusions in people's private lives

 ensuring speedy compliance with its desegregation rulings

 protecting people's right not to testify against themselves unwillingly

96hannahrayne · Answer

@Sophiaaaa @ganeshie8 @whpalmer4 @eyad @iheartfood @skullpatrol @e.cociuba @GoldPhenoix @brookecookie @essie891 @KingGeorge @kymber @Kitt020912 @Kagome_gurl8 @modphysnoob @mikelo40 @nicolebears @Noah16 @Luigi0210 @lastkings @Preetha @primeralph @Pyromancer @Ashleyisakitty @him1618 @jhonyy9 @Jemurray3 @iheartfood @thomaster @timo86m @apoorvk @.Sam. @Nurali @Compassionate @mikaa_toxica13

96hannahrayne · Answer

do you know the answer @Compassionate

96hannahrayne · Answer

@rosa123456

anonymous · Answer

Miranda v. Arizona, (1966) dealt with the need for individuals in police custody to understand their constitutional rights before being questioned by police. The specific protections addressed are the Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate oneself, and the Sixth Amendment right to legal counsel. The "fundamentals of fairness" standard, derived from the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause, demands that the accused be aware of his (or her) options in dealing with police so he can make informed decisions and not unwittingly act against his best interest.