Neither. They have an obligation to uphold the law. The chips fall where they may.
Answer: The Supreme Court, as does every other branch of the United States government, has an absolute responsibility to protect the rights of individuals. This is the Supreme Law of the Land and the only purpose of this government to begin with. If the Supreme Court is to uphold the law then they must begin by upholding an individuals rights. If a person has been accused of abrogating or derogating the rights of someone else, i.e. murder, then that person accused of such crime is entitled a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. This means there must be sufficient enough evidence to bring charges against this individual to begin with and once those charges have been made there is a process of trial that must be done in a speedy manner and the burden of proving guilt is placed upon the prosecution. If the prosecution is not able to effectively establish guilt, and a jury or judge lets the accused go, this is because of the law. The law has insisted the rights of that individual be respected. This does not discount the rights of the victim who has surely had their rights abrogated and derogated, but assuming it was murder, that victim can only rely upon the government sworn to uphold the law to effectively investigate this murder to effectively establish guilt upon that person they are investigating and to effectively prove this guilt in a court of law. That the government is held to this standard does not elevate the rights of a criminal over the rights of a victim. It holds as paramount the rights of all.
Bill of Rights and The Fourteenth Amendment.
duty to warn
The Supreme Court must be careful not to overstep its constitutional authority when overturning a law.
They protect Americans from abuses of government power.
Criminals must be prosecuted in order to protect the community. Punishing criminals will aid in the fight against crime in America.
The criminals have the right to remain silent, the right to an attorney, and they can appeal their case to a higher court
Texas Rangers were also to protect people from criminals.
Because that is their job. "To protect and serve". They are paid to go on the front line (risking their own lives) to protect us from criminals.
The US Supreme Court upholds and protects the integrity of the Constitution, at least in theory.
duty of care
duty to care
Protection against riots and civil unrest.
In short, to preserve peace and order, uphold and enforce laws, protect citizens, and apprehend criminals.
No. The police officer has a duty to protect the public from the criminals. Criminals are also part of the public, and the police do not have to help the criminals make good decisions. Police interrogators are not required to assist criminal suspects, but instead are permitted to trick them into confessing.