[desertsolitaire]

Isn’t that what we here in the USA call a bill of attainder or ex post facto law and they are unconstitutional here?

[Pox]

I call it “that last step you should have never taken”.

[NorthMountain]

It's an "ex post facto" law. That is to say, it seeks to punish actions taken in the past, when those actions were legal. A "bill of attainder" prescribes some punishment or outlawry on specific people just for being who they are.

[Campion]

It's an ex post facto law, and would be unconstitutional. (A "bill of attainder" is a law that singles out a particular person or group by name and imposes punishments on them without a trial or conviction.)

[unread]

"unconstitutional here?"

I don't think the constitution holds a lot of sway in DC nowadays, unless there's an outbreak of dysentery..