From the Dissent in The 5th Circuit Bump Stock Case
BY Herschel Smith
1 year, 11 months ago
Under the majority’s rule, the defendant wins by default whenever the government fails to prove that a statute unambiguously criminalizes the defendant’s conduct.
Um, yes. And so what’s wrong with this? Why wouldn’t any grammar school child come to the same conclusion? A fortiori, why wouldn’t any educated lawyer come to the same conclusion?
Why would this only have to come from the majority’s rule? Why isn’t it prima facie obvious to anyone with two brain cells?
On January 13, 2023 at 11:26 am, JG said:
This is called the Rule of Lenity. It is a longstanding Common Law principle whereby an ambiguous criminal statute is interpreted in favor of the defendant. It is something to be cherished and preserved in a free society, and unsurprisingly the dissent objects to this bedrock of liberty.