A state legislature passes a law retroactively increasing the criminal penalty for violation of a specific environmental regulation that was committed before the law's enactment. A company that was fined under the regulation before the new law passed challenges the statute as unconstitutional. Which legal principle is most relevant to assessing the constitutionality of the statute?
The correct answer is "Ex post facto law" because increasing the punishment for a crime after it has been committed violates the constitutional prohibition on ex post facto laws. That clause protects individuals and entities from retroactive criminal or penal legislation. "Bill of attainder" is incorrect because it concerns legislative acts that single out particular persons for punishment without a judicial trial. "Statutory preemption" involves conflicts between state and federal law, and "procedural due process" addresses fairness in legal proceedings rather than retroactive increases in punishment.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What are ex post facto laws?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why are ex post facto laws considered unconstitutional?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is the difference between an ex post facto law and a bill of attainder?