Posted on 03/24/2011 9:23:48 AM PDT by Palter
New rules allow investigators to hold domestic-terror suspects longer than others without giving them a Miranda warning, significantly expanding exceptions to the instructions that have governed the handling of criminal suspects for more than four decades.
The move is one of the Obama administration's most significant revisions to rules governing the investigation of terror suspects in the U.S. And it potentially opens a new political tussle over national security policy, as the administration marks another step back from pre-election criticism of unorthodox counterterror methods.
The Supreme Court's 1966 Miranda ruling obligates law-enforcement officials to advise suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present for questioning. A 1984 decision amended that by allowing the questioning of suspects for a limited time before issuing the warning in cases where public safety was at issue.
That exception was seen as a limited device to be used only in cases of an imminent safety threat, but the new rules give interrogators more latitude and flexibility to define what counts as an appropriate circumstance to waive Miranda rights.
A Federal Bureau of Investigation memorandum reviewed by The Wall Street Journal says the policy applies to "exceptional cases" where investigators "conclude that continued unwarned interrogation is necessary to collect valuable and timely intelligence not related to any immediate threat." Such action would need prior approval from FBI supervisors and Justice Department lawyers, according to the memo, which was issued in December but not made public.
Matthew Miller, a Justice Department spokesman, said the memo ensures that "law enforcement has the ability to question suspected terrorists without immediately providing Miranda warnings when the interrogation is reasonably prompted by immediate concern for the safety of the public or the agents."
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Can someone tell me, exactly, what rights a “Terror Suspect” has?
I would expect that a "terror suspect" who is an American citizen would have the same rights as someone who is suspected of, say, bank robbery.
If a republican administration had done this the libtards and msm would be having a major hissy fit. Obama and Holder are such hypocrites.
vaudine
i guess some people are more equal than others. all you have to do is call someone a terror suspect, and all sorts of nasty things kick in. who tracks these labelings for accuracy?
And those that are not American Citizens? I would think that they have the right to a speedy trial and immediate hanging if found guilty. All survivors of this should be shot.
Specifically changed to allow longer holds on Tea Partiers, FReepers, and others who terrify the administration.
I was thinking more on the lines of foreign terrorists that enter this country.
Anti-abortion protesters will soon be labeled “domestic terrorists”. The Feds have already used RICO against them.
Tea Partiers will be next.
The problem is, Obama, Holder and Napolitano are not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.