CrimLaw

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is unconstitutional to make a law ex post facto (after the fact). California and a number of States have extended statute of limitations so that they can reach really bad criminals after the limitation had run. The other States all struck the extensions down in the State courts. California's didn't.

"The fact" is the running of the statute of limitation. "After" is self explanatory. Still, "rather than engaging in this very simple analysis the court is trying to make the case fit under a 1798 precedent, Calder v. Bull. I forsee one of those almost-useless, fractured, 60 page supreme court decisions. How will it turn out? I know how it should turn out, but who can tell what the decision will actually be?

.