Instapundit was throwing around some legal terms (guess he really does have a day job as a Law Professor) in a post responding to Megan McCardle.
It makes sense to differentiate between laws that are laws because you need rules, and laws that are laws because certain actions are morally wrong. Even in a postmodern society, you'd hope that certain actions are beyond the pale.
But if amnesty is a good idea, why not go for it all, and rollback most federal laws that punish 'victimless' crimes.
Amnesty for illegals (but not coyotes and employers knowingly hiring illegals), amnesty for drug users (but not big time pushers), amnesty for gamblers (but not bookies), amnesty for tax cheats who pay back taxes less penalties (but not crooked accountants), couple that omnibus amnesty package with a shrinking of federal laws that punish lifestyle choices (those shouldn't go up past the local level). There might be a few more vices and social ills that have become federal crimes that I'm forgetting, but immigration violators, junkies, gamblers, and tax cheats are the ones that come readily to mind.
Other laws I'd de-federalize but not grant amnesty. A lot of the laws that create a federal crime out of violations that aren't federal in nature (child molestation, kidnapping to name two), have been added cause the urge for Congress to act is greater than their resolve to hold the size of government to the minimum size necessary. The other excuse for all these federal violations is to give the FBI an excuse to join the party. But, local law enforcement agencies have more resources than they used to, and cooperate on a regional basis better. Instead of facilitating streamlined investigations, FBI involvement becomes just another layer of bureaucratic crap that hinders rather than helps crime solving and later prosecutions.
The federal court system is bloated beyond the breaking point. Reduce it, and reduce its reach. This nation functions best when the federal government concentrates on truly federal problems, when the federal government reaches beyond that scope, it screws everything up and duplicates efforts best left up to the states.
The idea that this Congress or any future Congress would seriously consider passing a series of laws that reduce its influence nationally, and exhibit a sense of restraint when it comes to the scope of the federal government, is a flight of purest fancy, unfortunately.
25 June 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment