funsec mailing list archives
Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity
From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk () gsp org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 22:12:55 -0400
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 06:03:41PM -0700, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
What is unclear about the following? "No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." [1][2] How is this not a text book example of an ex post factor Law?
On June 21st, Jarrod Frates sent a message to funsec on that very topic, noting different considerations of civil vs. criminal law and citing Calder v. Bull (1798). I suggest reading his message and then that opinion. ---Rsk _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Paul Ferguson (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Alex Eckelberry (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Andy Sutton (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Jacob Appelbaum (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Larry Seltzer (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Jacob Appelbaum (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Larry Seltzer (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Jacob Appelbaum (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Larry Seltzer (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Alex Eckelberry (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Larry Seltzer (Jul 09)
- Re: A Sad Day For America: Senate Approves Telco Immunity Alex Eckelberry (Jul 09)