[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] O'Connor quoted at USA Today from Eldred oral argument
- To: "'dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] O'Connor quoted at USA Today from Eldred oral argument
- From: Richard Hartman <hartman(at)onetouch.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 17:52:01 -0700
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
That's a very laywerly weaseling around the restriction ...
--
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com
186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: D. C. Sessions [mailto:dcs@lumbercartel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 5:41 PM
> To: DVD-Discuss
> Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] O'Connor quoted at USA Today from
> Eldred oral
> argument
>
>
> On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 14:55, Richard Hartman wrote:
>
> > Make _what_ call?? There is no call to
> > be made! The Constitution expressly
> > forbids retroactive legislation in
> > Section 9, paragraph 3: "No bill of
> > attainder or ex post facto Law
> > shall be passed."
>
> That just prevents Congress from passing a law making something
> illegal after the fact, e.g. declaring the speed limit to be
> 35 mph after you've already gone by at 45, then socking you
> for speeding.
>
> It doesn't apply to making future actions (e.g. publication
> of _The_Jungle_Book_ less than 70 years after Kipling's death)
> illegal.
>
> --
> | The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. |
> | Because the slow, feeble old codgers like me cheat. |
> +--------------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> --------------+
>