Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1-2001
Abstract
Constitutional law scholars have long observed that many doctrinal rules established by courts to protect constitutional rights seem to "overprotect" those rights, in the sense that they give greater protection to individuals than those rights, as abstractly understood, seem to require.' Such doctrinal rules are typically called "prophylactic" rules.2 Perhaps the most famous, or infamous, example of such a rule is Miranda v. Arizona,' in which the Supreme Court implemented the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination4 with a detailed set of directions for law enforcement officers conducting custodial interrogations, colloquially called the Miranda warnings. 5
Recommended Citation
Caminker, Evan H. "Miranda and Some Puzzles of 'Prophylactic' Rules." U. Cin. L. Rev. 70, no. 1 (2001): 1-29.
Included in
Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Evidence Commons, Supreme Court of the United States Commons