Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

What do you think of the new legislation funding bill which will halt funding to the Justice Department if?

Ramos and Campion (sp?) are not released? I heard of this on Lou Dobbs tonight. I would appreciate it if someone could provide further details. Thanks in advance.

2 Answers

Relevance
  • Tmess2
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    My suggestion for anyone wanting to know the exact language in any currently pending legislative proposal is to go to thomas.loc.gov (the Library of Congress's web site for legislative information) and look up the bill.

    In looking up the house bill that includes the appropriations for the Department of Justice, I saw an Amendment that was offered by Representative Ted Poe (R-TX) to prohibit the use of funds for the purpose of enforcing the judgment entered in U.S. v. Ignacio Ramos. (Amendment 675 to HR 3093). The language does not cut off all funding from the Department of Justice, but merely prohibits it from being used to carry out the sentence of the court. (For those who are not aware, these two defendants were Border Patrol Officers who allegedly shot an individual without justification).

    Needless to say, this Amendment is blatantly unconstitutional and invades both the judicial and executive branch's authority. While the proponents of the Amendment have cited problems with the trial, the case is currently on appeal and it is the duty of the appellate courts to decide if the convictions are correct or if the local U.S. Attorney engaged in acts of prosecutorial misconduct. Likewise, if the appellate court affirms the sentence, it is the sole power of the President to decide whether or not to commute the sentence or pardon the defendants. As noted by the opponents of the Amendment, it is improper for Congress to decide which individuals will be kept in custody and which ones will be released -- especially via the appropriations process. The limit of Congressional authority is a joint resolution expressing the "sense" of Congress that the president should commute or pardon the defendant.

    It was, of course, hilarious reading Republican Representatives attacking the President for leaving these two individuals sitting in prison while commuting the sentence of Scooter Libby.

  • 1 decade ago

    That's effectively a Congressional forced pardon.... and that's an improper abuse of Congressional power.

    Congress has no constitutional mandate to determine innocence or guilt, outside of their inherent power to deal with witnesses before Congress or with regard to members of Congress.

    If Congress can do that, we might as well pack up the courts right now.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.