Vega v. Tekoh: secondo la Corte Suprema i Miranda warnings non sono diritto costituzionale

With the decision in epigraph, the Supreme Court of the United States deals with its historic precedent, Miranda v. Arizona, decreeing with a majority of 6-3 that the violation of the eponymous warnings during in custody interrogation does not constitute an infringement of constitutional rights, thus barring compensation under federal law. The contribution aims to analyse the arrest, as well as the dissenting opinion, in the light of the precedents of the Court and of the debate on the famous Miranda warnings, trying to particularly highlight whether the exclusionary rule of evidence they encompass can really be considered sufficient to protect the suspect. Furthermore, an attempt will be made to trace the profound contrasts of legal policy that still today are hidden behind this very well-known procedural safeguard.