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

To: JohnHuang2
Prosecutors in the Golden State spent last weekend scrambling to figure out a response to last Thursday's 5-4 decision that California had violated the Constitution's ban on ex post facto – after the fact – laws when the Legislature changed the time limit for bringing criminal charges in child sex-abuse cases to cover older cases.

Anyone have some details on this? Is Farah referring to a SCOTUS ruling or a CA SC ruling? Sounds absolutely vile.

3 posted on 07/02/2003 12:26:23 AM PDT by First Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: pram
Sorry. It is vile, though.
4 posted on 07/02/2003 12:26:57 AM PDT by First Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | 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