Using State Constitutions to Extend The Rights of Suspects in Criminal Proceedings

Abstract

Throughout the Twentieth Century, the United States Constitution has been regarded as the primary source of constitutional rights in this country. During Earl Warren's tenure as Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court most of the provisions in the Bill of Rights involving criminal procedure were held binding on state proceedings through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Since the early 1970s, a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court has been inclined to restrict procedural rights of the accused. In an effort to circumvent the U.S. Supreme Court and expand the rights of suspects, a movement to view state constitutions as sources of individual rights has developed. Though in its infancy, the movement toward state constitutional analysis is regarded as important because it may permanently alter the nature of legal analysis in the United States.