[Cyropaedia]

I ask you, exactly which crime would you have Congress "undeclare"? 18 U.S.C. §924(c)(1)(A)(iii)]? All of 924(c)? Are you now suggesting that the solution you were previously suggesting, 100 posts ago, was for Congress to unwrite the law, thereby relieving tens of thousands of criminals of sentences handed down under this law? Or, are you suggesting that the resident FR Constitutional attorney believes that a law could be undeclared and applied only to the case of Ramos and Compean, but leaving all other criminals sentences unchanged? Somehow, I don't think he is going to agree with that one.

Great point CCG. Bob doesn't understand the ramifications of what he's advocating.

The courts have declared that specific measures could be applied retroactively but only because they deemed them to be "regulatory" and not "punitive". We are talking about something that is clearly a bona fide punitive measure.

[calcowgirl]

Bob doesn't understand the ramifications of what he's advocating.

I'm just trying to understand what he is advocating--or what today's version is. It's a moving target.

I acknowledge that Congress could most likely declare a law null and void but I don't believe that could be selectively applied to only two individuals in a single case. So... he seems to be advocating that letting thousands of criminals out on the street is a way to help Ramos and Compean (which is anything but a reasonable solution).