Document Type
Working Paper
Publication Date
11-17-2007
SSRN Discipline
Legal Scholarship Network; Law School Research Papers - Legal Studies; LSN Subject Matter eJournals; Law School Research Papers - Public Law & Legal Theory; Constitutional Law, Jurisprudence & Legal Philosophy eJournals
Abstract
Relatively few recent commentators have focused on retroactive civil legislation commentators have instead tended to discuss retroactivity doctrine in the context of its applicability to criminal statutes administrative regulations or judicial decisions Retroactivity is widely acknowledged as a difficult legal doctrine and apparent inconsistencies in United States Supreme Court decisions have contributed to this perception Although the Courts 1994 Landgraf decision has been portrayed as reconciling the Courts prior decisions and as providing a framework for retroactivity analysis neither of these characterizations is entirely accurate Landgraf did not persuasively reconcile the Courts retroactivity jurisprudence and its purported framework is incompleteThe United States Supreme Courts recent decision in Martin v Hadix exposes Landgrafs shortcomings and thus provides the opportunity to review the doctrine pertaining to the retroactivity of civil legislation A careful analysis of the Courts decisions reveals a consistent approach to retroactive legislation an approach ultimately based in fundamental principles of fairness but which has been masked by the Courts terminology
Recommended Citation
Debra L. Bassett,
In the Wake of Schooner Peggy: Deconstructing Legislative Retroactivity Analysis,
(2007).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_working_papers/196