Ex Post Facto in the Constitution

Field, Oliver P.

Journal: Michigan Law Review

Volume: 20

First Page: 315

Year: 1922

Bluebook Citation: 20 MICH. L. REV. 315 (1922)

Author: Oliver Peter Field: all 36 publications


Abstract

Any study of the ex post facto clauses of the Constitution NwYh icshtu ddyid onf ott hceo mexm epnocset fwaicthto ac lcaousnessid eorfa titohne oCfo nCstaitludteiro nv'. Bull2 would not conform to good practice. The text writers and the commentators uniformly begin their treatment of ex post facto laws by citing it as the leading case, and setting forth its doctrine. There is singular agreement as to the correctness of the holding of the case.3 The statement given by Cooley is typical: "At an early day it was settled by authoritative decision, in opposition to what might seem the more natural and obvious meaning of the term ex post facto, that in their scope and purpose these provisions were confined to laws respecting criminal punishments, and had no relation whatever to retrospective legislation of any other description." 4 This doctrine of Calder v. Bull is so well settled as to have become one of the commonplaces of American constitutional law

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.