DOJ-OGR-00021118.jpg
696 KB
Extraction Summary
1
People
4
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal brief / appellate court filing
File Size:
696 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a legal brief (Case 22-1426) filed on February 28, 2023. It argues against the District Court's reliance on a floor statement by Senator Leahy regarding the PROTECT Act and the constitutionality of retroactive prosecution. The text contends that the court improperly applied the standards of 'Stogner v. California' (2003) to analyze Leahy's remarks, noting that Stogner was decided after the PROTECT Act was passed.
People (1)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Patrick Leahy | Senator |
Quoted regarding his opposition to a retroactivity clause in the PROTECT Act legislation.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| District Court |
The lower court whose reasoning is being critiqued in this document.
|
|
| Congress |
Passed the PROTECT Act.
|
|
| House of Representatives |
Mentioned as having passed the original bill with retroactivity language.
|
|
| Department of Justice |
Implied by Bates stamp DOJ-OGR (Office of Government Relations).
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Referenced in case citation Stogner v. California.
|
Relationships (1)
Floor statement cited in Congressional Record.
Key Quotes (3)
"I am pleased that the conference agreed to drop language from the original House-passed bill that would have extended the limitations period retroactively."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021118.jpg
Quote #1
"That language, which would have revived the government’s authority to prosecute crimes that were previously time-barred, is of doubtful constitutionality."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021118.jpg
Quote #2
"But Stogner is an unilluminating lens through which to analyze Sen. Leahy’s remark, as that case was not decided until after the PROTECT Act was passed."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021118.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document