“No person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself…”
Councilman v. Hitchcock [142 U.S. 547 (1892)]: Not incriminating a person for testimony is not the same as not requiring them to testify at all.
Brown v. Walker [161 U.S. 591 (1896)]: Congress passed a transactional immunity act to compel witnesses with the promise that they cannot be prosecuted for such testimony. SCOTUS upheld it.
Kastigar v. U.S. [406 U.S. 441 (1972)]: Compelled testimony is legitimate, given a grant of immunity.
Minnesota v. Murphy [465 U.S. 420 (1984)]: Voluntary testimony in compelled program (here, for sex offenders) is not automatically covered by Fifth Am. Privilege. Defendant should have invoked his 5th Am. privilege but failed to do so.
Brogan v. U.S. [522 U.S. 398 (1998)]: the “Exculpatory no” doctrine (you don’t get penalized for false statements if you falsely deny your guilt) is not protected by the 5th Am. You may still have criminal liability for the false no under federal law. (SCOTUS overruled this doctrine here.)
Ohio v. Reiner [532 U.S. 17 (2001)]: A witness who claims no involvement in a crime may still assert a Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination (and not testify).
Salinas v. TX [570 U.S. ___ (2013)]: Fifth Amendment Privilege does not extend to defendants who simply decide to remain mute during questioning (they have to invoke it)–unless there’s evidence of government coercion.