It's a conflict at the nexus of law and order. Can a new law make a past event a crime if it wasn't a crime when it happened? Can a novel circumstance create a law that negates an act protected by the constitution just because the concept is new?
Current conventional wisdom lauds these 'windows' that negate statutes of limitation in certain circumstances. However, history may not look so kindly on this behavior, especially if this newly opened 'window' becomes a pandora's box that is used, in the future, to revive crimes that are extremely unpopular.
For instance, can the GOP pass a law that says past abortions are now deemed criminal and can be pursued through criminal or civil litigation? I sincerely believe this is the path we are on if we do not change course soon.
I am being careful with my words because I am an advocate of the fruits of the Me Too movement and the cultural shift that has stopped dismissing the victim. However, in the past, a new law based on a new social norm would only affect cases going forward. For instance, what if all the behavior of people that was supported by Jim Crow laws was criminalized, not just going forward, but past behavior could be litigated either through civil or criminal court. The effect such would have on our society would likely rip the social fabric apart. Indeed, we are witnessing the shredding of our social fabric based largely on new attitudes of society at large. I concur with these new attitudes! I was the victim of abuse under the old norms and am now living more freely because of these changes. However, I still recognize that criminalizing what was once acceptable behavior and pursuing punishment legally is a very dangerous road to take. My past abusers can no longer do what they once did to me and that is progress. If I were to seek retribution now, legally, by benefit of a "window", no one would benefit. While it may give me personally a sense of redress, it would not change the world for the better because the world has already changed and our laws now reflect that. Instead, it is likely to inflame the passions of not only the past abuser, but all of the people that are touched by my pursuit of justice, creating a cognitive and social dissonance that calls into question whether justice or equity has been achieved.
Do I agree with the LA Supreme Court decision? Absolutely NOT! Do I empathize with the victims? Absolutely! Do I think this legal "window" has corrected an injustice? I'm not so sure. I fear the precedent that these "window" laws creates. I fear that the future may see "window" laws criminalizing past behavior that was not criminal at the time or that has lost its virtue due to untimely justice. Untimely justice can be used perniciously and, given the nature of those in the MAGA movement, I fear they will find a way to abuse this legal "window" in the worst possible way.
Peace
See my clarification of the point I am trying to make and my apology for not using very good examples in my post No. 18 below. LINK to Post 18
= new reply since forum marked as read
