New York v. Quarles
b. Miranda v. Arizona
Door is simply one of those cases that is crucial, that calls for knowledgeable advisement regarding
Synonyms could include principal, primary, cardinal, vital, utmost, supreme, or overriding. (It means of greatest importance.)
No, the US Supreme Court is not currently considering any cases questioning Barack Obama's US citizenship. These claims have been thoroughly debunked and rejected by multiple courts in the past.
No. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution and federal laws is definitive. There are situations where a federal agency (or the Federal Reserve) could change its policy slightly to try to work around a Supreme Court decision while still basically doing the same thing, but that isn't "overriding" the Supreme Court.
It is called the "Miranda" Decision.
Miranda v. Arizona
Brown v. Texas
I have ther questions: 1.- which branch has 4 ways of overriding the actions of the legislative branch 2.- what branch has 5 ways of overriding the actions of the executive branch 3.- what is the minimum number of years of sitizenship required to serve as a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court
no... Once the U. S. Supreme Court makes a decision in the interpretation of a law or a part of the Constitution, a precedent is set, and their decision holds the same weight as the original law. The President can no more overturn a Supreme Court decision than he/she can make a new law without Congress. The President can, however, sign into law a bill that has passed both houses of Congress that repeals or modifies a law or Constitutional clause on which a Supreme Court decision has been rendered, thereby, in effect, overriding the Supreme Court.
If somebody is not read her Miranda rights, she might incriminate herself during questioning. Anything she says will not be admissible as evidence in court. This precedent was set by the supreme court in 1966.
police were required to inform suspects of their right to remain silent and have a lawyer present during questioning the decision established the clear and present danger test judging free speech