Read what I said; they frequently are. Furman v Georgia did not strike down future death penalties, it invalidated the sentence of every person on death row.
That means that if something is legal in 1860 the Constitution does not allow a ruling in 1868 to go back and charge the actor after the fact .
Say what?
"Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired. It certainly follows that the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union." - Chief Justice Chase.
i.e., ex post facto application.
You are incorrect on that.
That’s what the LAW says.
That's what your opinion of what the law says.
I think the reason you antagonize so many people on FR...is that you cherry-pick other’s comments, take them to a place they never were, and then toss in an aside that, while on the surface may seem relevant, but in fact is not. It is, well...a non-sequitur.
The reason why I antagonize you and your friends is that I won't sit back and put up with the nonsense. If I think you're wrong then I say so, and that antagonizes y'all because you can't come up with facts to back your claims. Uncomfortable, I know.
...(besides you pathological hatred of anything and everything Southern, which is, in all candor, alarming...
Another vintage Southron pot-meet-kettle moment considering it can be no more alarming than the pathological hatred of anything and everything Yankee demonstrated by you and your buddies.
My direct ancestors arrived on these shores in the 1630s from England and did their parts in founding this once great nation. I hate no one and simply seek the truth of what actually happened in that era which BTW is NOT contained in public school history books because they were written by people exactly like you or who were under duress (had a gun pointed at their heads) when they wrote. You can call that hatred all you want but it will never-the-less remain a lie!
“Read what I said; they frequently are. Furman v Georgia did not strike down future death penalties, it invalidated the sentence of every person on death row.”
Yet again, you misinterpret what was been said. I will say it one more time, and then I am done with you.
It is unconstitutional for an ex post facto ruling to apply retroactively so that the ruling would allow an actor, whose act was legal at the time of commission, to be charged after that act was determined to be illegal.
N-S, I have tried to carry on a legitimate discourse with you, not only on this thread, but on several others. You, however, are consumed by some pathological aversion to anyone and anything that may run counter to what you hold sacrosanct, such that you have become what you so profess to abhor: An intolerant bigot.
You are, quite frankly, not worth any further consideration.
A really good example of an overreaching jurist pretending to rule on matters ultra vires his bench, and making it up as he goes along.
"The People are wrong! Long live the Reich!"
The dissent got it right. But Chase wasn't on the Court to get it right. He was on the court to cover his own and Lincoln's ass, from charges of having started a political war in North America that killed nearly a million people, all of them Americans.