Amendments aren’t easy to legislate

To make the changes to enact unconstitutional legislation regarding child abuse that Brenda Dick and followers desire would require amending two constitutions.

The Pennsylvania Constitution would be simple compared to amending the U.S. Constitution as codified in Article V.

An amendment would have to make it through two-thirds of both Houses of the U.S. legislature, or on application of two-thirds of the legislatures of the several states and then be ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.

By the time that would take effect, the people she wants imprisoned would be dead.

But the important thing is, one does not want to grant any legislature authorization to enact any retroactive law because, sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, they will want to enact other retroactivites, none of which would be beneficial to society in general.

If you don’t think they would, I do have, as the old saying goes, “some nice sink hole filled swamp land for sale.”

Dick likes to call this situation a “legal loophole” without regard to the dangers of ex post facto legislation.

The prohibition of ex post facto legislation in the U.S. Constitution is not something recent, designed to coddle criminals, it was designed to prevent government overreach by enacting retroactive tax collection laws or making previous legal acts a crime that one can be punished for even though the act was prior to passage of the specific law.

The clause was in the Constitution when it was ratified, as written in the Constitution 230 years ago.

Getting people stirred up about a virtually impossible task and chastising politicians for not voting for something that is obviously unconstitutional is not only a waste of effort, it is totally unfair to the politicians who already have a portion of the population upset with them.

I am not, in any way, shape or form defending any sort of sexual abuse, child or otherwise, but Brenda Dick is encouraging people to promote something that will not happen no matter her opinion of how much she wants it.

It would be virtually impossible to construct an amendment that would limit changes to only victims of child abuse.

I am, though, defending the U.S. Constitution and our legal system that works fairly decently. Nothing is perfect, so don’t start useless arguments regarding its efficacy.

Tim Toroian

Altoona

COMMENTS