Role of the U.S. Supreme Court in Criminal Justice Policy Making

Introduction

The High Court of the U. S, established in 1789, is the uppermost Federal court in the United States, with authority of judicial review. Justice Marshall, later on, gave the power binding authority. There are presently nine seats on the US highest Court.The Supreme Court has a particular role to take part in the United States structure of government. The Constitution offers it the power to ensure the actions of the Congress and the President. Supreme Court cannot compel the execution of policies. Instead, it must count on the executive and legislative branches to back its decisions.(Cassese, Gaeta, Baig, Fan, & Gosnell2013).

The U.S. Supreme Court choices constitute a form of public policy. Through the understanding of the law, it engages in policymaking straightly touching the events of law enforcement and more mostly, the criminal justice system. In regards crimes, e.g. sex assault, the U.S. Supreme Court has offered decisions reflecting the laws’ multiplicity.  Decisions have addressed cases involving civil commitment, sex offender treatment, extensions of statutes of limitations for sex crimes, capital punishment for rapists among others.

How the court’s decisions changed the Miranda Advertisement

The US Supreme Court grimly established this official decision. In that case, murder suspect refused to sign an acknowledgment of his Miranda rights, and then later made statements that were applied against him in his conviction for the crime. The Court ruled the on the Miranda advertisement that; the suspects should be informed of their constitutional right to stay silent. Further, the courts do not have to use information obtained from the defendants who were warned, did not disregard their constitutional rights.

It also gave the police officers the leeway to change the words that had been used in the notice; and invoking of suspects especially those who had previously mentioned their rights.

The people who had knowledge of their rights and behaved in a manner inappropriate with their exercise might be known to have waived their rights meaning that responding to police interrogation is itself an implicit waiver of the right to stay silent.If the police fail to make you alert of your Miranda rights, nothing said in reaction to a custodial questioning can be used aligned with you.

Potential issues to be evaluated in the future by the U.S Supreme Court to shape criminal justice policy

Advancement in technology can help in alteration of the way fairness is administered in supreme courts. New technologies are as well used in a trial and judicial decision-making. For example, computer models based on the social science research are used in assessing the likelihood of recidivism.

The continuous scientific investigation provides the criminal justice scheme with an array of telecommunications technologies. Surveillance technology can improve the inquiry of the offense. Computers will present unlimited potentials for aggregating the information and sharing it with other legal justice agencies. They can also be applied to simulate the results of alternative correction and prevention strategies. (Bailey&Maltzman, 2008). Another field is molecular biology. Studies of the genetic and chemical basis of individual behavior or mental operation promise new techniques for identification, screening and using body fluids. They may also become the foundation of behavior control.

U.S. Supreme Court criminal justice decision impact on social justice.

The effects of U.S. Supreme Court, for instance, in its decisions on sex offenders, relies on social scientific evidence and does so in a manner that accurately accords with this evidence.  The findings can be summarized by:Firstly, the case of sex offenders decided during the past two decades, and the Court included references to social science research. Second, the Court typically not only provided references to social scientific study but also provided accurate summaries of it.  There were some instances in which the interpretations of research involved either incorrect or misleading claims because they didn’t provide appropriate context. (Epstein, Martin, Segal&Westerland, 2007). As a result, some claims and assertions made by the Court gave the misleading appearance of being evidence-based and thus supported more general lines of argument with seemingly clear justification. Indeed, many criminal justice policies have been undertaken based on incorrect assessments of the need for such systems and the theories underlying them.

Conclusions

Some sound policies have a superior impact on humanity than others. The judiciary plays a bigger role in developing the nation’s policies than the legitimate framers envisioned. Nevertheless, American courts are not supreme institutions. They were considered with severe restrictions and located in a political system of separated powers. To ask them to generate significant social changes is to forget their past and disregard their constraints.

Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100
Use the following coupon code :
SKYSAVE