Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

markodochartaigh

(4,146 posts)

2. Hmmm. I doubt that the current supremacist court will object though.

Reply to MayReasonRule (Original post)

Fri Jul 18, 2025, 04:41 PM

Jul 18

Retroactive legislation may raise various separation-of-powers concerns. For example, in Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 U.S. 211 (1995), the Supreme Court held unconstitutional on separation-of-powers grounds a statute that would have required federal courts to reopen final judgments entered before its enactment because the law interfered with the judicial power to rule with finality.

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF11293

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

MayReasonRule

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

'How convenient': GOP just unveiled a new 'Act' to make you forget what Donald Trump and Epstein did together [View all] MayReasonRule Jul 18 OP

Right. Retroactive laws. Raven123 Jul 18 #1

Hmmm. I doubt that the current supremacist court will object though. markodochartaigh Jul 18 #2

So, I guess that would invalidate about 50 years of proclamations, pardons, and EOs. sinkingfeeling Jul 18 #3

Well, there's a whole bunch of J6 pardons right out the window. JHB Jul 18 #4