Posted on 06/10/2021 8:29:52 AM PDT by ScubaDiver
Bfl
I think that has actually come up before, been litigated. I don’t know how it was resolved. Presumably though, however it was resolved, it worked out for the state because here we are.
Sometimes there is more than one option that will work, and switching between them has more costs than either of the options. For that, precedent is reasonable. Having made a mistake should not be justification for continuing to be wrong, but some things are both workable and ‘good enough’.
“But please think about a situation where anyone can argue “the law means what *I* say it means at this moment in time” would really mean for law-abiding citizens nationwide.”
And that’s pretty much the kind of nation we may well be turning into.
I completely disagree. It is perfectly acceptable that conviction for a felony carries a two-part or even a three-part sentence. The first part of the sentence is a temporary loss of many of your constitutional rights (prison), the second part is a loss of a smaller, but still significant, number of rights (probation or parole) and the third part is a loss of an even smaller number of rights (firearms, voting, certain occupational certificates, registration as a sex offender, etc.).
There is nothing wrong, or unjust, with multi-part sentences, they are common throughout the US and many other countries. The only unjust part might come if additions to the losses were made after the crime were committed. But, with modern laws, the multi-part penalties are codified long before the crime.
Just where in the constitution does it say there can only be one penalty for a crime? And constitution law by examples from TV shows does not count.
I was expressing what some folks think, not taking a pro or con position myself.
I am not in general disagreement with you, though I think many 2nd, third & X parts of sentences ought to be time or conditional limited and not permanent. I do believe that reform and the condition of “restitution paid” should be possible and not foreclosed.
Roberts joined the liberals AGAIN! All thanks to deep stater GWB appointing him!!!! This is an outrage that the Bush crime family stuck us with this activist lib--
Oh wait... you mean it was TRUMP'S GUY, Gorsuch, who voted to the LEFT of Roberts... AGAIN?
Nothing to see here folks, now move along.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.