Supreme Court Argument!

Yesterday was definitely one of the highlights of my semester here in Washington D.C .We had the opportunity to attend a Supreme Court oral argument. The case was called JBD v. North Carolina. This case dealt with the Miranda rights and whether or not a police officer should consider a child’s age before issuing the Miranda rights.

The child in the case was a thirteen year old boy who was suspected in two break-ins. The police questioned him while he was at school without giving him a Miranda warning, and J.D.B. made incriminating statements. He argued that he had been subjected to custodial interrogation and that the court should take into account his age when determining whether he was in custody. Because the Miranda warnings had not been read to him he was not in custody, and the statements were used as evidence. He was convicted, placed on 12 months of probation, and was ordered to pay restitution.His lawyers argued that age should be a factor in determining whether he was in custody for Miranda purposes. But, the State of North Carolina believed it would be too subjective for police officers to make this determination. The Supreme Court was asked to determine if the age of an individual questioned by police affects whether that individual is in custody and must receive Miranda warnings?

This was a great case to sit in on because the judges were quite animated and at times became annoyed with the lawyers and one another. Justice Breyer was one justice that particulary disagreed with the lawyer representing North Carolina. Some of his statements included: "Ukrainian. He only speaks Ukrainian," Breyer continued. "Do you take that into consideration?" "Yes," Cooper answered."Then why aren't you willing to take into account an ambiguous situation?" Breyer asked."Your honor, because those are obvious circumstances," Cooper responded. In a juvenile's case, he said, "you have to think like an 8-year-old, or think like a 15-year-old."Breyer shot back: "You have to think like a Ukrainian speaker or like a person in a wheelchair!" I did not expect a Supreme Court judge to be as animated as Breyer was. He had the whole court laughing. My favorite quote from the whole hearing was when Scalia said to Breyer “Well, who reads the dissents anyway.”

Overall this was a great opportunity to see how our government really operates. I now have a better understanding of the Supreme Court and how hearings actually occur in that court room.