This case asks the Court to decide whether federal investigators are bound by the procedures set forth in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). While the Court in Miranda declined to require the presence of counsel for an accused during a custodial interrogation, Miranda at least ensures that a suspect be informed of his or her Fifth Amendment privilege and have a continuous opportunity to assert it. This knowledge and opportunity are both critically important for the indigent and often ill-educated clients served by the NLADA’s members. Further, abandoning Miranda’s bright-line rules would relegate police, prosecutors, defense counsel and courts to the days before 1966, when all found it difficult to discern when a constitutional line had been crossed during a police interrogation.