Why This Exists
Rights beyond reach
Constitutional protections mean little if a person waives them without realizing it. Studies show that most civilians—under stress, confusion, or social pressure—talk to police after Miranda, agree to “consensual” searches, and never clarify whether they are free to leave. In other words, the rights that matter most are also the rights most frequently lost at the roadside or station.
The four-line Invocation
We focus on the four protections that are both most often waived and simplest to lock in with one sentence each:
- Silence — “I am invoking my right to remain silent.”
- Counsel — “I want an attorney.”
- No search — “I do not consent to any searches.”
- Freedom to leave — “Am I free to go?”
Standardizing this wording does for civilians what the Miranda script did for officers: it creates a shared baseline that courts immediately recognize.
Why one script powers many projects
- Consistency fuels culture. Wallet cards, lock-screen graphics, role-play drills, and officer-training modules all reinforce the same lines, preventing message drift.
- Measurable impact. Uniform language lets researchers and agencies track invocation rates—for example, by scanning body-cam transcripts for the exact phrases.
- Scalable ecosystem. Educators, public defenders, translators, and YouTubers can plug into a shared standard instead of reinventing phrasing.
Who benefits
- Civilians: clear, stress-proof protection and a cleaner evidentiary record.
- Officers: immediate clarity on encounter boundaries, reducing liability and courtroom disputes.
- Courts & prosecutors: fewer ambiguous transcripts and simpler suppression analysis.
- Researchers & policymakers: data streams that enable cost-benefit studies and iterative improvement.
From tool to civic habit
The long-term vision is a cultural norm as ordinary as buckling a seatbelt: a brief, polite invocation that people, officers, and judges all expect—and that consistently protects everyone’s rights.