Statement opposing the retroactivity clause due to doubtful constitutionality.
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.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein communication