Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

EggyRepublic t1_ja0bkw3 wrote

Reply to comment by AcusTwinhammer in ELI5. What happens to ‘criminals’ when the law changes and what they were imprisoned for is no longer illegal? by L0rdTeddingt0n

Is it possible for the government to retroactively charge people with crimes, or is that unconstitutional?

5

The-Wright t1_ja0fo57 wrote

Retroactively charging someone for an action that was legal when they performed it is called an ex post facto charge, and the US Constitution explicitly prohibits both federal and state authorities from pursuing them

64

Chrona_trigger t1_ja2afky wrote

I'm glad that wasn't attempted by the umpa lumpa

Only because the idea didn't occur to him, I'm sure.

1

Dorocche t1_ja1tmrp wrote

Yes, it's unconstitutional in the US according to Article 1, Section 9

8

wojtekpolska t1_ja2r4dg wrote

"lex prospicit non respicit" (the law works foward, not backwards) has been a fundamental part in any legal systems, going all the way back to the holy roman empire

so yes, people cannot be charged for something, that was not illegal when they did it. when someone is charged for something, only the laws that were in effect at the time of the "crime" are considered

3

quintazore t1_ja2ig6h wrote

That very thing was legal back in Ancient Rome. Odd to think people accepted such a scary concept

1