1

A Day in The Life: American Court Justice

Caitlin Peters

02.17.2022

Regent University

PARA 230

Professor Jason Wiegand

Author Note

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

&

Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. __ (2013).

“Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.”

Job 38:4 KJV

AMERICAN COURT JUSTICE DECISIONS 2

Abstract

Everyday courts all over the country are making life changing decisions. Lower courts

are incarcerating innocent young men. Higher courts are bringing justice to lower court errors.

Federal courts are deciding the fate of the country and the citizens residing here. It is important

to understand the origin of cases that define our freedoms.

AMERICAN COURT JUSTICE DECISIONS 3

A Day in The Life: American Court Justice

Each day we attempt to exercise our “rights & freedoms”. Ij two different cases that was

brought in front of the Supreme Court are Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) and

Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. __ (2013). Although,

these cases are extremely different in context. They are not different in that we must rely on our

court system to have our best interest at the forefront of all their decisions.

Impacts

Each case seen in court impacts Americans. Whether we realize the impact of cases we

don’t have any information about. The truth is they impact everything, everywhere, every day.

Understanding the US Constitution and what it protects is a crucial part of being American.

When to exercise those rights is a beautiful privilege not all countries are blessed to have. It is up

to us as individual to make sure these rights are not destroyed.

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966):

This case was originally seen in Arizona Superior Court. Ernesto Miranda was convicted

of rape, kidnapping, and robbery (GSU.edu Miranda v. Arizona 1966). Where it was then

appealed to the Arizona’s State Supreme Court, and they affirmed the Superior Courts

judgement. Ernesto Miranda was sentenced to 20-30 years in prison. Ernesto then appealed to the

United State Supreme Court where the justices were found law enforcement in violation of the

Fifth and Sixth Amendments (Cornell Law: Miranda V. Arizona (1966))

AMERICAN COURT JUSTICE DECISIONS 4

Final Decision

The final decisions were 5 to 4 in favor of Miranda (GSU.edu Miranda v. Arizona). I

agree in part with each Justices opinion and in part disagree. Justice Warren wrote the majority

opinion where is took the stance in favor of legal safeguards. “defendants while being held in

custody were only admissible in court if they were preceded by certain procedural safeguards, in

order to protect the Fifth Amendment. Indeed, the accused must be made clearly aware of his

privilege against self-incrimination and must have the possibility to exercise this privilege.”

(Justice Warren, June 13, 1966, Miranda V. Arizona, (GSU.edu)) I am fully agree with the

Justice and the importance of safeguarding Americans and protecting the intended rights of the

United States Constitution. As for Justice Clark he “suggested to rely not on the exclusionary

rule, but on the “totality of circumstances” in each case in order to decide whether a statement

resulting from interrogation should be admissible in court.” (Justice Clark, June 13, 1966,

Miranda V. Arizona, (GSU.edu)). I disagree with Justice Clark entirely. For the main reason,

“totality of circumstance” is like “discretion of circumstance” and that is unpredictable. I firmly

believe that there needs to be a set of rules. Once those rules are satisfied than discretion may be

needed. There is nothing fair or just about discretionary courts. When it becomes the test in

which cases are held to, court becomes a “shot in the dark”. I do not believe in court being

conducting in this manner. Although, that may mean that criminals go free cause they played the

game better than the prosecuting attorneys. Sadly, there was no justice in this case. Law

enforcement must follow the rule just as the does everyone else. Discretion leads to corruption,

corruption leads to anarchy, anarchy leads to war, and war leads to an unnecessary loss of life.
AMERICAN COURT JUSTICE DECISIONS 5

Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. __ (2013):.

Sometimes the things that seem good are not. When we give life to someone. We take life

from another. The universe is a give and take. Playing God is a dangerous game. Myriad found

genetic mutations that were present in breast and ovarian cancer patients. (Justia 2013) On the

surface, this seems as though it is a good thing. In this case New York District Court had initial

jurisdiction. It was then appealed to The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

This case is different in that it is a civil, patent case, not criminal. Making this case

“discretionary jurisdiction” and a class action lawsuit. In 2013, an appeal was filed with the

Supreme Court as all lower courts ruled in favor of Myriad and their patents.

(BreastCancerAction.org, 2013)

Final Conclusion:

“The Supreme Court granted certiorarito to answer the question, “Are human genes

patentable?” (PharmaPatents 2013). Supreme Court Justices “2012 decision in Mayo v.

Prometheus for its discussion of the “considerable danger that the grant of patents [on laws of

nature and natural phenomena] would ‘tie up’ the use of such [basic] tools [of scientific and

technological work] and thereby ‘inhibit future innovation premised upon them.’” (Supreme

Court Opinions, Association For Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., June 13,2013).

It would seem inhumane to disagree. Yet, it took numerous lower court make judgements in

favor of the patents before the Supreme Court could step in and give a final rule. In whole I agree

with the Supreme Court. The topic of human gene mutation for the sake of science is a

contentious and taboo topic. The majority of court judges to being in agreement with a topic of

such magnitude is more than unsettling. My biggest concern is not surrounding the guidelines

laws put in place when deciding where to draw the line and where to not. My concern is centered
AMERICAN COURT JUSTICE DECISIONS 6

in the lack of regard to humans on a large scale. Almost as if, “it wasn’t their genes. So, its for

the greater good. The benefits outweigh the risks in the long run” (my opinion quoted).

1 Corinthians 6:19 - What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost

which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
AMERICAN COURT JUSTICE DECISIONS 7

References
AMERICAN COURT JUSTICE DECISIONS 8

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)

1.) https://sites.gsu.edu/us-constipedia/miranda-v-arizona-1966/#:~:text=After%20his

%20conviction%2C%20Miranda%20appealed%20to%20the%20Arizona,States

%20Supreme%20Court%20where%20the%20case%20granted%20Certiorari.

2.) https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-

summary-miranda-v-arizon

3.) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/384/436/

4.) https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/12-398

5.) https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/miranda_v_arizona_(1966)

Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. __ (2013):

1.) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/569/576/

2.) https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-398_1b7d.pdf

3.) https://www.bcaction.org/myriad-timeline-and-update/

4.) https://www.foley.com/en/insights/publications/2013/06/supreme-court-decides-myriad-

gene-patents-case-hol