In the U.K., such a law — distant cousin to our own draconian enactments on eagle feathers and exotic woods — has (presumably inadvertently) wound up ensnaring museums. [Guardian]
Chronicling the high cost of our legal system
Schools for Misrule
Get your copy today! My new book tackles the question of why so many bad ideas come from the law schools. "Cutting-edge commentary, hard-hitting, witty, astute." -- Publisher's Weekly. "Excellent... A fine dissection of these strangely powerful institutions" -- Wall Street Journal.
Cato Institute
Individual liberty, free markets, and peace: the world's premier libertarian think tank. Publishes Cato at Liberty, where I blog on contemporary policy issues.
{ 1 comment }
What I really find Orwellian about this is that no one stated that an ex post facto law is illegal. Rather, they reluctantly admitted that this particular law was mistakenly put in place. In fact, ex post facto laws are a feature and not a bug of the English law. According to Wikipedia “In some nations that follow the Westminster system of government, such as the United Kingdom, ex post facto laws are technically possible as the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy allows Parliament to pass any law it wishes. “
Comments on this entry are closed.