According to critics of the Warren court, the Miranda v Arizona decision was seen as an example of the judicial activism (option a).
The Warren Court is a term to refer to a period in the history of the United States Supreme Court in which Earl Warren served as Chief Justice from 1953 to 1969.
His management in this position had quite a few critics because they considered him a person who was doing judicial activism with his decisions in this court. An example of one of his most striking decisions is the case of Miranda v Arizona, where he argued that the interrogations made to Miranda were not legal.
Note: This question is incomplete because there is some information missing. Here is the complete information:
Read the excerpt from the Supreme Court’s Miranda v. Arizona decision.
Prior to any questioning, the person must be warned that he has a right to remain silent, that any statement he does make may be used as evidence against him, and that he has a right to the presence of an attorney, either retained [hired] or appointed.
—Miranda v. Arizona
The Warren Court was the US Supreme Court during Earl Warren’s service as chief justice from 1953 to 1969. Warren Court critics believed that decisions like Miranda v. Arizona were examples of
judicial activism.
states’ rights.
affirmative action.
constitutional overreach.
Learn more about Warren Court in: https://brainly.com/question/14270054
#SPJ1
