Essay on "Decisions of Rehnquist & Warren"

Essay 8 pages (2798 words) Sources: 7

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Atwater held that such arrest does not violate the provisions of the Fourth Amendment.

As indicated earlier, it was expected that the Rehnquist Court would mark the dawning of a new era in conservatism in decisions originating from the U.S. Supreme Court. Chief Justice Rehnquist had indicated his strict conservative leanings in the decision that he had participated in while he was an associate justice in the Burger Court and the fact that he was appointed to be Chief Justice by conservative President, Ronald Reagan, was thought to be a foreshadowing that Rehnquist would exercise extreme conservatism as Chief Justice. Additionally, Rehnquist followed Chief Justice Burger who most experts argue successfully retreated from the criminal procedure decisions of the Warren Court. These same experts predicted that the Rehnquist Court would be worse for criminal defendants than was even the Burger Court.

The reality, however, is that the Rehnquist Court never successfully altered any of the major Warren decisions in a way that substantially changed the rights of criminal defendants. Statistically, the Rehnquist Court actually found in favor of criminal defendants in appeals brought before it. In this regard, the Rehnquist Court issued few cases that can be considered in the same light as those issued by the Warren Court. The Rehnquist Court seemed content to clarify the landmark decisions rendered by the Warren Court as opposed to issuing landmark cases of its own. This position by the Rehnquist Court disappointed the conservative sector but it typified the attitude of the Court in the latter years of the Court's term. For example, the Rehnquist Court was presented with several search and seizure cases but in half of them the Court produced decisions that favored, in whole or in part, the positions offered by the criminal defendants. For example, in the case of Minnesota v. Dickerson, the Rehnquist Court ruled that the continued search of a suspect on the basis of a lump in his pocket that was determined not to be a weapon was unconstitutional (Minnesota v. Dickerson, 1993). Conservative followers of the Court wanted it to rule the search constitutional because it resulted in the finding of bag of cocaine but the Court ruled that once the officer's safety was no longer in question any further search was unwarranted (Hurley, 1993). The holding in Dickerson, although not what Conservatives might have wanted, remained consistent with the Warren Court's holding in Terry.

For the most part the Rehnquist Court did not stray far from the dictates established by the far more liberal Warren Court but there were some minor cases where it did demonstrate its Conservative leanings. In Arizona v. Evans, the Court refused to suppress evidence improperly seized due to a clerical error (Arizona v. Evans, 1995), and allowed detention and search of an individual based on suspicion of a civil traffic violation in the case of Whren v. United States but for the most part the Rehnquist Court failed to make any serious inroads into the rights expanded by the Warren Court (Whren v. United States, 1996).

Although the Rehnquist court failed to make any serious inroads into the application of the exclusionary rule and the parameters set by the Warren Court, it did leave a lasting impression in other areas of criminal procedure particularly in regard to prisoner rights and corrections. Through its decisions the Rehnquist led Court changed many of the key position tests for determining possible violations of prisoners' rights by either blocking the expansion of rights that began under the Warren Court or by reducing those same rights. In this regard, three specific cases stand out as examples of this movement by the Court. In Wilson v. Seiter) (Wilson v. Seiter, 1991), the Rehnquist Court established that a culpable state of mind and a deliberate indifference was necessary in order for a prisoner to establish that the conditions of his confinement violate the Eight Amendment. In Turner v. Safley (Turner v. Safley, 1987), the same Court recognized the interests of the prison system in invoking rules and regulations that are designed to protect the security of the prison. In order to protect this interest the Court declined to use a strict scrutiny standard of review and, instead, determined that prison rules and regulations must be reasonably related to a legitimate purpose. Finally, in Lewis v. Casey (Lewis v. Casey, 1996) the Rehnquist Court held that prisoners do not have an abstract right to a law library but must demonstrate that the library that they have at their disposal hindered their efforts to pursue a legal claim.

Overall the Conservative Rehnquist Court made few substantive changes in the application of the standards established by the Liberal Warren Court. Rather, the Rehnquist Court was seemingly content in defining the boundaries of these standards as opposed to enforcing its Conservative ideology. In the early years of the Rehnquist Court there was some indication that there may be some substantive changes by the Court but as the years progressed these indications lessened and the changes never developed. Instead, the Rehnquist Court seemed content to affect changes in the area of sentencing and corrections. In doing so, the Court constructed a reactionary stance in the area of criminal procedure and law and abandoned any attempt at revolutionizing this area of the law. In short, criminal rights did not improve under the Rehnquist Court but they did not deteriorate significantly either.

In the final analysis, there is no denying that the Warren Court was clearly liberal but classifying the Rehnquist Court as clearly conservative is not so easy. Despite expectations, the Rehnquist Court ended up extending many of the liberal doctrines developed during the Warren era. The Rehnquist Court, combined with the Burger Court, had many opportunities to alter or overturn the decisions of the Warren Court but with rare exceptions they declined to do so. As a result the legacy of the Warren Court and its expansion of rights in the area of criminal procedure remain largely unchanged. As for the Rehnquist Court its legacy in the area of criminal procedure must be considered to be in the areas of sentencing and corrections. In these areas the conservatism of the Court is apparent and the Rehnquist drastically reduced prisoner's rights and limited the guarantees formally recognized by the Warren Court.

References

Arizona v. Evans, 514 U.S. 1 (U.S. Supreme Court March 1, 1995).

Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 (U.S. Supreme Court April 24, 2001).

Bloom, R.M. (2010). Cases on Criminal Procedure. Riverwoods, IL: CCH .

California v. Minjares, 443 U.S. 916 (U.S. Supreme Court August 22, 1979).

Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157 (U.S. Supreme Court December 10, 1986).

Dickerson v. United States, 530 U.S. 428 (U.S. Supreme Court June 26, 2000).

Escobedo v. illinois, 378 U.S. 478 (U.S. Supreme Court June 22, 1964).

Fliter, J.A. (2001). Prisoner's Rights: The Supreme Court and Evolving Standards of Decency. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (U.S. Supreme Court March 18, 1963).

Hurley, J.L. (1993). Has the Supreme Court "Wrenched the Sixth Amendment from its Proper Context?." University of Toledo Law Review, 991-994.

Israel, J.H. (1977). Criminal Procedure, the Burger Court, and the Legacy of the Warren Court. Michigan Law Review, 1319-1425.

Jenkins, J.A. (1985, March 3). The Partisan. New York Times Magazine, p. 28.

Lewis v. Casey, 516 U.S. 804 (U.S. Supreme Court June 24, 1996).

Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (U.S. Supreme Court June 19, 1961).

Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (U.S. Supreme Court June 7, 1993).

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (U.S. Supreme Court June 13, 1966).

Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (U.S. Supreme Court July 6, 1976).

Terry… READ MORE

How to Reference "Decisions of Rehnquist and Warren" Essay in a Bibliography

Related Essays:

Effects of Supreme Court Decisions Essay

Supreme Court Decisions

The Nature and Purpose of Counseling

Effects of Supreme Court Decisions

Effects of Supreme Court Decisions

The major tenets of criminal procedure are widely known and accepted… read more

Essay 7 pages (2427 words) Sources: 6 Topic: Crime / Police / Criminal Justice

---

Justice Scalia Brennan and Rehnquist Term Paper

Supreme Court

The Justices of the Supreme Court differ in the way they interpret the law and apply it in individual cases. All are reading the same law, but they… read more

Term Paper 8 pages (3127 words) Sources: 3 Style: MLA Topic: Law / Legal / Jurisprudence

---

Supreme Court Cases Case Briefs for Five Term Paper

Supreme Court Cases

Case Briefs for Five (5) Supreme Court Cases

Case

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) (Brown I)

Argued: December 9-11, 1952

Reargued: December 7-9,… read more

Term Paper 5 pages (2082 words) Sources: 5 Topic: Education / Teaching / Learning

---

Federal Courts Term Paper

U.S. Supreme Court was created and the authority to create inferior federal courts was left to the discretion of Congress. Congress exercised this discretion by creating a system of district… read more

Term Paper 9 pages (2633 words) Sources: 0 Topic: Law / Legal / Jurisprudence

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>