Court Opinion

ID: 9424034
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:10:00.385719+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:47.714885
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Stewart,
concurring.
I join Part II of the Court’s opinion. As to Part I, I have before now expressed my conviction that the Fifth Amendment guarantee against compulsory self-incrimination was originally intended to do no more than confer a testimonial privilege in a judicial proceeding.1 But the Court through the years has drifted far from that mooring; the Marchetti and Grosso cases2 are simply the most recent in a long line of decisions marking the extent of the drift. Perhaps some day the Court will consider a fundamental re-examination of its decisions in this area, in the light of the original constitutional meaning. Until that day comes, it seems to me that the authoritative weight of precedent permits no escape from the conclusion reached by the Court in this case. I therefore join its opinion and judgment.

 See Grosso v. United States, 390 U. S. 62, 76 (concurring opinion); In re Gault, 387 U. S. 1, 80, n. 3 (dissenting opinion).

 Marchetti v. United States, 390 U. S. 39; Grosso v. United States, 390 U. S. 62.