Have you read the petition for Cert linked in post #35, or the amicus brief filed by numerous former federal judges, prosecutors and a former Director of the FBI supporting the upholding of Michigan v. Jackson?
Read the petition and you will change your mind.
This was one of the unfortunate little “you scratch my back, I scratch yours” hideyholes in the old tradition. Where it was presumed that the government was OK to carry on whatever con game it managed to succeed at. Its elimination came squarely under the rubric of due process of law. We are not talking about Roe v. Wade penumbra of emanation sophistries here.
I am quite familiar with Michigan v Jackson. I’m also quite aware of how one-sided what you posted is likely to be. BTW, it was the Court itself that asked parties a few weeks ago to file on the question of whether Jackson should be overruled. This was after oral argument. It’s quite rare for the Court to do that, so odds are very good that there are five votes to overrule.
Look here. Note that this was months after oral argument http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/07-1529.htm
The parties are directed to file supplemental briefs addressing the following question: Should Michigan v. Jackson, 475 U.S. 625 (1986), be overruled? The briefs, not to exceed 6,000 words, are to be filed simultaneously with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 2 p.m., Tuesday, April 14, 2009. Amicus briefs, not to exceed 4,500 words, may be filed with the Clerk and served upon counsel to the parties on or before 2 p.m., Tuesday, April 14, 2009. Reply briefs, not to exceed 3,000 words, may be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 2 p.m., Friday, April 24, 2009.