To: Libloather
Isn’t that a bill of attainder and therefore unconstitutional?
5 posted on
03/22/2021 3:55:57 AM PDT by
RC one
(When a bunch of commies start telling you that you don't need an AR15, you really need an AR15)
To: RC one
Isn’t that a bill of attainder and therefore unconstitutional? Well ... yeah ... but does that stuff matter any more? It's a whole new world now.
7 posted on
03/22/2021 4:04:19 AM PDT by
ClearCase_guy
("I see you did something -- why you so racist?")
To: RC one
in exactly whose court is anything “unconstitutional” any longer?
9 posted on
03/22/2021 4:07:55 AM PDT by
mo
("If you understand, no explanation is needed; if you don't understand, no explanation is possible)
To: RC one
> Isn’t that a bill of attainder and therefore unconstitutional? <
I was thinking along those same lines. Ex post facto laws are prohibited by the Constitution. But...an ex post facto law is a law that punishes some act that was legal when it was done.
Entering the Capitol as it was done on January 6th was not legal. So I don’t know if the ex post facto prohibition would apply. I think it would because they are trying to add new penalties to old crimes.
10 posted on
03/22/2021 4:08:21 AM PDT by
Leaning Right
(I have already previewed or do not wish to preview this composition.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson