this would be is someone that you could apply this to if, maybe based on the initial questions on the immediate threat, you realize he is part of something bigger and we can t just stop and prosecute him. people want this guy to trial, but if he knows information, that s more important. that is the key question. is this something bigger? is there somebody directing him overseas or elsewhere. jordan, thank you so much. interesting perspective. they re going they re not happy with the miranda decision. what we rarely hear about the terrorists whose native country is chechnya. what do their origins tell us about their intentions and do they tell us anything at all? we ll talk with the head of cia s bin laden unit, the former head of that. he weighs in. that s coming up next. [ lisa ] my name s lisa, and chantix helped me quit. i honestly loved smoking, and i honestly didn t think i would ever quit. [ male announcer ] along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help peop
much as other individuals in the future who may be forced to confess to crimes they didn t commit. the miranda decision came about when the federal courts felt that the police were abusing their rights, and they were getting coerced confessions and that innocent people were being convicted, and this miranda decision came along to make sure that suspects knew they had the right to an attorney which is guaranteed by the u.s. constitution. so i think in the long run, that s what we have to worry about, the erosion of the rights of american citizens, but this public safety exception has existed since at least 1984, and if there s a legitimate fear there may be other explosive ordnance out there that can endanger the public it s certainly a legitimate use of that doctrine. so i don t see a huge problem at this point but we ve got to follow the case closely. certainly is spawning a lot
supreme court. they think that it, too they, too, think it s unconstitutional. so the president has a problem on the left. so as much as he wants to get his supporters, the democratic base, whipped up over this legislation, this is not a discussion that he really wants to have in these terms. he doesn t want to relitigate what many liberals consider the shortcomings, the failures of this signature achievement of his term. megyn: now after taking a lot of criticism for not marking in any real, significant way the two-year anniversary of the law, the white house has seemed to try to change its messaging on that. the campaign, that is, not the white house, but the obama campaign came out with t-shirts that say, that read health reform is still a bfd, quoting our vice president. they have a tweet now with the hash tag i like obamacare. they ve made the strategic decision to embrace the term obamacare, so i guess that s okay on all sides to say now, used to be considered more derisive
devry university, proud to support the education of our u.s. olympic team. megyn: fox news alert, we are getting new details from the supreme showdown over health. welcome to a brand new hour of america live, everyone, i m megyn kelly. health care, really. we ll get to those details in a little while, but first, the high court s decision on pram many s signature president obama s signature achievement could have a far-reaching impact on the reach of government, on your health care for years to come and on the race for the white house in 2012, something president obama is clearly aware of. the obama administration working aggressively behind the scenes right now to increase support for the controversial law encouraging liberal groups to voice their support as we saw some health professionals doing outside the supreme court earlier today. we are a rich and prosperous nation. it is only morally right that a
court of the united states, and i think julien and are i are in complete agreement, they need to get to the merits of this. why d you give an hour and 30 minutes to something that really shouldn t have been that big of an issue, but they did. based on the questioning that came forward in the court, it s becoming pretty obvious at least by the oral arguments, the fact is the court will address tomorrow the individual mandate, and i expect that one way or another that decision will come out at the end of june. the questioning looked like it went today almost from all the justices with the notable exception or two that the court was going to reach the merits. interestingly, a couple of conservative judges that in the lower courts have said that the anti-injunction act applied. megyn: virginia. i m going to play a little bit of audio because i think it s interesting to hear the justices. let me just set this up for you because it s a little confusing. here s the deal. the court wanted to h