How did the ruling in the Miranda v. Arizona case change law enforcement procedures?(1 point)
Responses
Law enforcement may question a suspect before reading a suspect their rights.
Law enforcement may question a suspect before reading a suspect their rights.
Law enforcement must read a suspect their Miranda rights prior to being interrogated.
Law enforcement must read a suspect their Miranda rights prior to being interrogated.
Law enforcement may interrogate a suspect without the presence of an attorney.
Law enforcement may interrogate a suspect without the presence of an attorney.
Law enforcement may search a home without a warrant.
Law enforcement must read a suspect their Miranda rights prior to being interrogated.
Which statement best identifies how the Second Amendment was interpreted in the McDonald v. Chicago case?(1 point)
Responses
The Supreme Court extended rights that are not explicitly outlined in the Constitution.
The Supreme Court extended rights that are not explicitly outlined in the Constitution.
The Second Amendment was interpreted to include the rights included in the First Amendment.
The Second Amendment was interpreted to include the rights included in the First Amendment.
The Second Amendment was interpreted to include the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Second Amendment was interpreted to include the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Supreme Court does not have the authority to interpret any amendment in the Constitution.
The Second Amendment was interpreted to include the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Which statement best assesses the impact of the cases Marbury v. Madison and McCulloch v. Maryland on the Constitution?(1 point)
Responses
Both cases increased the powers of the federal government.
Both cases increased the powers of the federal government.
Both cases increased the powers of the executive branch.
Both cases increased the powers of the executive branch.
Both cases increased the powers of the judicial branch.
Both cases increased the powers of the judicial branch.
Both cases did not increase any federal power.
Both cases increased the powers of the judicial branch.
Law enforcement must read a suspect their Miranda rights prior to being interrogated.
The correct answer is: "Law enforcement must read a suspect their Miranda rights prior to being interrogated."
In the Miranda v. Arizona case, the Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement must inform suspects of their rights, known as the Miranda rights, before conducting a custodial interrogation. These rights include the right to remain silent and the right to have an attorney present during questioning.
Prior to this ruling, law enforcement could question suspects without informing them of their rights. However, the Miranda decision established that suspects must be made aware of their rights in order to ensure that any statements they make can be considered voluntary and not coerced.
As a result, law enforcement procedures have changed to require that suspects be read their Miranda rights before being interrogated. This means that if a suspect is in custody and is being questioned by law enforcement, they must first be informed of their right to remain silent and their right to an attorney.