What does the U.S. Supreme Court say about the "stop and clarify" approach to requests for counsel?

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the "stop and clarify" approach concerning requests for counsel is only applicable when there is an unambiguous request for counsel. This means that law enforcement officers are required to recognize a clear and unequivocal request for legal representation during an interrogation. If a suspect expresses their desire for an attorney in a manner that leaves no doubt about their intent, officers must cease questioning and clarify the situation.

This standard helps ensure that individuals' rights under the Sixth Amendment are protected. Officers are trained to identify such requests and respond appropriately to safeguard the subject's right to counsel. Hence, the option that states it can only be legally asserted by an unambiguous request reflects the legal framework that governs these situations, reinforcing the necessity of clarity in the communication of a request for an attorney. The other options either mischaracterize the legal requirements or overgeneralize the circumstances in which this approach applies.