Talk:Dickerson v. United States

Whoa!

So pretty good article till I get to the last line:

"Basicly Dickerson won in the Supreme Court, because the statements he made to the FBI when they interrogated him were done without reading his Miranda rights and they obtained a search warrant from that which they found tons of evidence in his house."

"Basically" is spelled wrong and "tons" of evidence? Whoa, I say. 72.145.146.20 (talk) 03:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Missing context

This article is missing context of "turf war" between the Congress and the Supreme Court that led to the decision. It could go under a heading of "Constitutional Politics" or some such thing. Rehnquist didn't want to sanction Congress's ability to preempt the Court's ruling and thus preempt the Court's status as Constitutional arbiter to have sole review of its own decisions. I'll try to do some research and come up with something. Ryanluck (talk) 02:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)