Holder Wants Miranda “Flexibility”

May 11th, 2010 by Lee Eldridge

In a pretty significant policy change from the administration, Eric Holder wants “flexibility” in the Miranda system. This is from the Huffington Post:

Attorney General Eric Holder said for the first time today on ABC’s “This Week” that the Obama administration is open to modifying Miranda protections to deal with the “threats that we now face.”

“The [Miranda] system we have in place has proven to be effective,” Holder told host Jake Tapper. “I think we also want to look and determine whether we have the necessary flexibility — whether we have a system that deals with situations that agents now confront. … We’re now dealing with international terrorism. … I think we have to give serious consideration to at least modifying that public-safety exception [to the Miranda protections]. And that’s one of the things that I think we’re going to be reaching out to Congress, to come up with a proposal that is both constitutional, but that is also relevant to our times and the threats that we now face.”

It would be interesting to know who initiated this policy change. Holder has been steadfast in his desire to prosecute terrorism as a criminal offense in civil courts, and award terrorists the same rights that are required for U.S. citizens, and not enemy combatants. Personally I think this is a move in the right direction, though it won’t play well with Obama’s base.

3 Responses to “Holder Wants Miranda “Flexibility””

  1. ralphie Says:

    actually, the democrats gravitate to any solution to a problem – we dont get told by our white-ass leaders to vote against shit we know is right for america

  2. Bobby Says:

    This is purely politics. Obama is getting slammed when it comes to national security. Getting blame for his soft “police” stance on domestic terrorism. I guarantee you this wasn’t Holder’s idea.

  3. Lee Eldridge Says:

    Hey Ralphie, as an independent I will say that I don’t see a lot of solutions coming from either party. And I wouldn’t characterize this change in policy from the WH as gravitating towards a solution.

    It’s possible that they’re finally coming to grips that the war on terror cannot be handled like a simple crime. And that solutions are not as easy as they expected (see the closing of gitmo that the president promised before taking office). But I tend to agree that this is probably more politically driven than solutions driven. The WH has been losing this battle with the public since unilaterally deciding to put terrorists on trial in NY — a decision that obviously will be fixed at some point in the future. This may be them coming to grips with reality, or it may be some political cover.