Colton Benz
DB 1
Top of Form
“It is easy for men … to be zealous advocates for the rights of the citizens when they are invaded by others, and as soon as they have it in their power, to become the invaders themselves” (Hamilton 1790).
I believe this statement from Alexander Hamilton emulates the precise reasoning for including the Ex Post Facto clause in Article 1 of our Constitution. The official language remains, “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed” (Article 1 Section 9). As far as public policy is concerned, this section of the Constitution prevents tyrannical injustices and keeps the government from becoming the law. If the government has the power to dictate what should be illegal, then the entire foundation of law crumbles under the whimsical of the current prestige of power–for the current political party would create law as they saw fit and any who opposed them would be incarcerated.
Ex Post Facto is Latin for “From a thing done afterwards” (Anneberg 2019) and the prohibition of it essentially means that the Federal and State governments cannot punish an individual for a crime committed before something was written into law. This prevention outlined in our Constitution has tremendous benefits as far as liberty from tyranny is concerned– it prevents the establishment from imposing laws after the fact and imprisoning rivals. Throughout history, tyrants and dictators alike have imprisoned their political enemies, threats to their power, and those who disagree or stand against their rule by establishing laws dictating whatever the party in power pleases to be illegal. The founders saw fit to eliminate this political abuse of power both on the State and Federal levels. As far as the negative aspects to the Ex Post Facto are concerned, there are few. Perhaps, theoretically, a society could completely abolish abortion and make it a criminal offense. Without the Ex Post Facto clause, any and all parties that took part in an abortion could be criminally prosecuted for actions committed when it was legal. This doesn’t sound Constitutional at all and begs the question would am individual have committed the same actions if it were illegal? Some, perhaps, but not all.
Psalm 82:3 declares, “Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute”(English Standard Version). As a Christian, this ideal takes precedent over written law established by man and by whatever clauses that may be. Yet, thankfully, I believe in the Constitution and the equal protection under the law given to us as citizens by the aforementioned document. To some, the Ex Post Facto clause may be seen as a way of inhibiting justice in the rarest and most extreme of circumstances, yet, to the vast majority and common occurrences, it remains a powerful section of the Constitution that inhibits malicious tyranny and exemplifies the truest nature of freedom and liberty established by our Founders.
Anneberg. (2019, June 3). Article I, Section 9. Retrieved May 16, 2020, from https://www.annenbergclassroom.org/article-i-section-9/
Ex Post Facto Laws – Further Readings. (n.d.). Retrieved May 16, 2020, from https://law.jrank.org/pages/6630/Ex-Post-Facto-Laws.html
Bottom of Form