Attorney General to "Modify" Miranda Rights for Terror Suspects

In the year, ahem, 1984, law enforcement agencies were given a so-called "public safety exception" to the Miranda rights law, enabling them to interrogate suspects without reading them their rights if they believe a threat is imminent; i.e. the "ticking time bomb" scenario. In the wake the high-profile arrests of the failed Times Square car bomber and the failed Christmas bomber—who were both read their rights after some interrogation—Attorney General Eric Holder is asking Congress for even more flexibility when interrogating terrorist suspects. On ABC's "This Week," Holder said:

I think we have to first say that the system that we have in place has proven to be effective. We have used our law enforcement authorities that we have as they now exist very effectively. People have been given Miranda warnings. People have continued to talk, as was the case here, as was the case with Abdulmutallab in Detroit...

The public safety exception comes from a case called Quarles that dealt with a—the robbery of a—of a supermarket. We're now dealing with international terrorism. And if we are going to have a system that is capable of dealing in a public safety context with this new threat, I think we have to give serious consideration to at least modifying that public safety exception.

Holder was vague on exactly how the law would be modified, but there is currently no set time limit on how long interrogations can go on without Miranda rights being read, and it seems Holder wants Congress to clarify that aspect of the exception. (Read the full transcript from the interview here.)

Rudolph Giuliani also appeared on "This Week," and while he praised Holder's proposal, he says it doesn't go far enough in stripping American citizens like Faisal Shahzad of their rights. "I would not have given him Miranda warnings after just a couple of hours of questioning," Giuliani said. "I would have instead declared him an enemy combatant, asked the president to do that, and at the same time, that would have given us the opportunity to question him for a much longer period of time."

And the ACLU's Anthony Romero tells the Times that Congress has no authority to “chip away” at the Miranda ruling because it was based in the Constitution: "The irony is that this administration supposedly stands for the rule of law and the restoration of America’s legal standing."