Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GOPcapitalist
An ex post facto law is unconstitutional, Wlat. Try again.

Strictly speaking, an ex post facto law is one which makes illegal an act which was legal when committed, or increases the penalty for a crime after it was committed. An act of congress authorizing Jackson's actions after the fact doesn't qualify as an ex post facto law. Same with President Lincoln.

648 posted on 04/25/2003 1:10:02 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 629 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur
Strictly speaking, an ex post facto law is one which makes illegal an act which was legal when committed, or increases the penalty for a crime after it was committed.

It is commonly percieved to be so, and the classic examples of ex post facto laws fit that description, but the constitution itself places no such criteria on ex post facto - it merely bans them from being enacted. A law that legalizes a previously illegal action after the fact to benefit a friend is accordingly no less "ex post facto" than one that bans a previously legal action after the fact to harm an enemy.

651 posted on 04/25/2003 1:46:37 PM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 648 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson