Whether a criminal defendant whose government imposed restraint is perceptible to a jury must show actual prejudice, or whether prejudice inheres

For over fifty years , this Court ’s precedent has provided that physical restraints are inherently prejudicial . They present an unacceptable risk of improperly influencing a juror’s decision on guilt or innocence . See Illinois v. Allen , 397 U.S. 337 (1970); Estelle v. Williams , 425 U.S. 501 (1976); Riggins v. Nevada , 504 U.S. 127 (1992); Deck v. Missouri , 544 U.S. 622 (2005). In the decision below, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected th ose precedents , crafted a new prejudice framework , and held that, under th at new framework , ankle monitors are not inherently prejudic ial. The question presented is: Whether a criminal defendant whose government imposed restraint is perceptible to a jury must show actual prejudice, as the decision below held, or whether prejudice inheres, as this Court ha s held. (ii)