The Supreme Court has reaffirmed the Miranda decision.
According to
this decision, the police -- and the courts -- may not
assume that you know you your rights; the police are still
required to inform you of your rights when arresting you.
The Supremes, while refusing to say how they would have ruled
on the original Miranda case, did say that Congress
can't overrule the Miranda decision:
(a) Miranda, being a constitutional decision of this
Court, may not be in effect overruled by an Act of
Congress.
...
(b) This Court declines to overrule Miranda. Whether or
not this Court would agree with Miranda?s reasoning and
its rule in the first instance, stare decisis weighs
heavily against overruling it now.
It's interesting to note, and perhaps very lucky for all of
us, that the court didn't need to rule on the validity of
Miranda, or of 18
U.S.C. § 3501, which Congress passed in the wake of
Miranda. Today's conservative court would most likely
have voted against Miranda.
Predictably, conservative Justices Scalia and Thomas
dissented, with Scalia writing
something unintelligible about Egyptian ruins:
Today's judgment converts Miranda from a milestone of
judicial overreaching into the very Cheops Pyramid (or perhaps
the Sphinx would be a better analogue) of judicial arrogance.
In imposing its Court-made code upon the States, the original
opinion at least asserted that it was demanded by the
Constitution. Today's decision does not pretend that it is-and
yet still asserts the right to impose it against the
will of the people's representatives in Congress. Far from
believing that stare decisis compels this result, I
believe we cannot allow to remain on the books even a
celebrated decision-especially a celebrated
decision-that has come to stand for the proposition that the
Supreme Court has power to impose extraconstitutional
constraints upon Congress and the States. This is not the
system that was established by the Framers, or that would be
established by any sane supporter of government by the people.
Prick.