Dan Riehl Misses Big On Miranda Rights For Faisal Shahzad

Over at Riehl World View, Dan is musing that not giving the Times Square bomb suspect his Miranda rights amounts to a "carve-out" and minimizes the rights of an American citizen.

Many on the Right might disagree, but within our current system, I don't think it's a good idea to start making carve outs like this on Miranda. I doubt they would survive a court challenge. Naturalized, or not, the government made him a citizen. That affords him the same Constitutional protections we all enjoy. Looking at that process, as opposed to making ad hoc decisions that impact Constitutional protections might be the wiser move.

John McCain was quoted as saying:

         "Don't give this guy his Miranda rights until we find out what it's all about".  


Dan, with due respect, McCain got this one right, and you're dead wrong.

The suspect should NOT receive Miranda protection for this incident. Especially in light of subsequent arrests of other in Pakistan in relation to this event.  Allow me to explain why...

One of the tests of Miranda application is whether the activity is considered criminal:

"...Under the exclusionary rule, a Miranda-defective statement cannot be used by the prosecution as substantive evidence of guilt. However, the Fifth Amendment exclusionary rule applies only to criminal proceedings. In determining whether a particular proceeding is criminal, the courts look at the punitive nature of the sanctions that could be imposed. Labels are irrelevant. The question is whether the consequences of an outcome adverse to the defendant could be characterized as punishment. Clearly a criminal trial is a criminal proceeding since if convicted the defendant could be fined or imprisoned. However, the possibility of loss of liberty does not make the proceeding criminal in nature..."

Terrorism, whether internal or external, is not and should not be a CRIMINAL act, rather it's an act of aggression or an act of war.  It should be treated as such, and therefore suspects are NOT required to receive Miranda protection.  That the suspect is (or is not) a citizen in trumped by the act of aggression.

This is how it SHOULD be.  AND if in the course of investigation, no profound link to charges of terrorism are discovered, Mirandize him and place him in the criminal system as prosecutors see fit.  But not until.

One of the things Eric Holder and Mr. Obama have done as part of their "Pussification of America Doctrine" is further blur the lines between criminal and hostile acts.  And this is why we are here today - a nation hobbled from within by Socialism and Liberalism. And we should not be extending the same rights guaranteed to regular citizens to alleged enemies of state.

As always, one man's opinion.  In this case, not even a lawyer's opinion - YMMV

-LTB