• Last updated on November 11, 2022

The Supreme Court’s decision established that the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination applied to the states.

Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.,Brennan, William J., Jr.;Malloy v. Hogan[Malloy v. Hogan] wrote the 5-4 majority opinion for the Supreme Court, reversing a contempt citation of a person who declined to testify in a state court. The Court’s ruling applied the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination to the states under the Fourteenth Amendment’s incorporation doctrine. The Court thus reversed a long-standing position that states needed only to achieve fundamental fairness, not strict adherence to the exact terms of the Bill of Rights, to provide due process as required by the Fourteenth Amendment. Although the case did not involve a confession, the decision does appear to be a forerunner of the Miranda v. Arizona (1966) decision. Justices Tom C. Clark and John M. Harlan II rejected the majority’s application of the privilege to defendants in state proceedings. Justices Potter Stewart and Byron R. White agreed with the majority that the privilege against self-incrimination applied to the states but dissented because they did not feel that the facts of this case fit the privilege.Self-incrimination, immunity against;Malloy v. Hogan[Malloy v. Hogan]

Due process, procedural

Exclusionary rule

Fourteenth Amendment

Incorporation doctrine

Miranda v. Arizona

Self-incrimination, immunity against

Categories: History Content