What did Sandra day o'conner have to do with Miranda vs Arizona?

Answer 1

Certainly nothing directly. She would have cited it a multiplicity of times in the opinions that she wrote. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), is a landmark case of the Supreme Court of the United States that established the right to remain silent when undergoing interrogation incident to arrest to the extent of governing the admissability at trial of inculpatory or exculpatory statements and other testimony in evidence. It also established the predicate right to consult with an attorney incident to such questioning.

Miranda gave rise to the Exclusionary Rule, and it is often considered the cornerstone of defendants' rights law.

Miranda was a product of the Warren Court. The majority were led by Warren, C.J., joined by Justices Black, Douglas, Brennan and Fortas. A partial concurrence and dissent was written by Justice Clark, while a dissent was written by Justice Harlan, joined by Justices Stewart and White.

Justice O'Connor was nominated to the Court by Ronald Reagan and confirmed to the Court by Congress in 1981. The first female Supreme Court Justice, she retired from the Court in 2006. She often sided with the conservatives on the Court but was also often known as the "swing vote".

Justice O'Connor's most important cases were McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, 540 U.S. 93 (2003); Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003); Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639 (2002); Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000); United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995); Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000); Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989); and Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).

Legal scholars are familiar with her for having developed the Constitutional Law doctrine of intermediate scrutiny.