Terrorism and Homeland Security: Reexamining the Public Safety Exception to Miranda Rights

In October 2010, US Attorney General Eric Holder issued a memorandum to the Department of Justice authorizing the initial questioning of terrorists suspects without providing Miranda Warning protections. In the contexts of Terrorism and Homeland Security, the legal rationale for this exception to the Miranda requirements was the “public safety exception” to Miranda established in the US Supreme Court decision NY v. Quarles (1984). The memorandum was an expansion of the public safety exception as it applied to terrorists suspects questioned without Miranda as it was established in US. v. Khalil (2000). Coinciding with this memorandum were several terrorism cases that tested the use of the public safety exception before the courts.

The cases involved Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab- the December 25, 2009 Christmas Bomber; Faisal Shahzad- the May 2010 Times Square Bomber; Dzhokhar Tsarnaev- the 2013 Boston Marathon Bomber; Ahmad Khan Rahimi- the 2016 Chelsea Bomber and more recently Sayfullo Saipov- the NYC terror attack on Halloween 2017 in Battery Park. With the material provided below, and as pointed out in the e-text- one of the larger challenges in investigating terrorism attacks is maintaining civil liberties while also achieving public safety. There may be no other issue that crystallizes this challenge. For this week’s discussion board posting and in utilizing the materials in the text and provided below please discuss:

Terrorism and Homeland Security

• 1) What was the public safety exception created in NY v. Quarles and how was this expanded in US v. Khalil?;
• 2) What were the issues and arguments raised by both Abdulmutallab and Tsarnaev to have their statements suppressed because their statements did not fall under the “public safety exception”?;
• 3) Saipov is currently awaiting trial, in the context of Abdulmutallab and Tsarnaev’s arguments- should any statement made by Saipov prior to being Mirandized be used against him at his upcoming trial?
• 4) And ultimately- in reviewing the Holder Memorandum and the arguments both for and against the use of the public safety exception involving terrorists suspects- do you support the use of this exception and the potential violation of Miranda protections in furtherance of public safety, or do you believe it is an abuse of the exception and diminishes civil protections in the name of terrorism and fear- explain your opinion!

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1983/82-1213
https://casetext.com/case/us-v-khalil-3
https://newrepublic.com/article/112991/boston-bombings-assault-miranda-rights
https://newrepublic.com/article/112991/boston-bombings-assault-miranda-rights
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/20/tsarneav-arrest-miranda-warning/2099353/
https://www.democracynow.org/2013/4/22/glenn_greenwald_on_boston_marathon_arrest
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Evs0NCW-fU&feature=emb_logo
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-york-city-terror-suspect-sayfullo-saipov-bragging-about-attack-from-hospital-bed/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YURWKhQEOcM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_ExqmVK-XE
http://icof.infobaselearning.com/icofprintarticle.aspx?articleID=6292aa&citation=mla
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/21/us/a-debate-over-delaying-suspects-miranda-rights.html
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/letter-ag-holder-regarding-terrorist-suspects-and-miranda-warning