On Tue, 21 Jan 2014, Philip Shaw wrote: > On 20 Jan 2014, at 21:38 , Cari Machet <carimac...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > FYI now they make laws that are retroactive to indict - i know of a > > case (or 5 actually) where the law was made to indict and convict 2 > > years after the "crime" yup ppl went to fed prison for years ... seems > > the breech of the rule of law by the US has come more out of the > > shadows > > Do you have a citation for those cases? I?m not doubting you, but the > legal sophistry to argue that an ex post facto law was constitutional > despite the explicit prohibition would be interesting. I?ve heard of > cases where higher penalties were applied than existed at the time > (which IIRC is banned by the ECHR and possibly the CCPR, although is > allowed in the USA and elsewhere), or where statutes of limitations were > extended, but a blatant ex post facto law seems surprising.
Telecom/NSA/*retroactive immunity* ring a bell? //Alif -- Those who make peaceful change impossible, make violent revolution inevitable. An American Spring is coming: one way or another.
