User:ThePerseid SCD/Sandbox

Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214, (also known as AEDPA) is an Act of Congress signed into law on April 24, 1996. The bill was introduced by then-Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, passed with broad bipartisan support by Congress (91-8-1 in the United States Senate, 293-133-7 in the House of Representatives) following the Oklahoma City bombing, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton.

History

The bill was introduced by then-Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, passed with broad bipartisan support by Congress (91-8-1 in the United States Senate, 293-133-7 in the House of Representatives) following the Oklahoma City bombing, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton.

Soon after it was enacted, AEDPA endured a critical test in the Supreme Court. The basis of the challenge was that the provisions limiting the ability of persons to file successive habeas petitions violated Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the US Constitution, the Suspension Clause. The Supreme Court held unanimously in Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651 (1997), that these limitations did not unconstitutionally suspend the writ.

In 2005, the Ninth Circuit indicated that it was willing to consider a challenge to the constitutionality of AEDPA on separation of powers grounds under City of Boerne v. Flores and Marbury v. Madison, but has since decided that the issue was foreclosed by circuit precedent.

Summary

Title I - Habeas Corpus Reform

AEDPA heavily reformed habeas corpus in the United States, narrowing the circumstances under which a federal or state prisoner may appeal a federal or state district court's denial of petition for habeas relief. A one year deadline for state prisoners to file a federal habeas petition was established, and a one year statute of limitations was imposed. Repetitious habeas petitions were prohibited, and federal courts were permitted to dismiss petitions and bar habeas relief on a claim already passed by a state court unless the decision was illegal or disregarded presented evidence.

The confidential nature of the habeas request and the approval of certain services available to poor death row inmates were eliminated. State prisoners were required to use every possible opportunity for state remedial action before federal habeas relief could be granted. Thus, federal habeas procedures were streamlined for death row inmates who could not afford their own legal representation.

Title II - Justice For Victims

Title II has three subsections: Mandatory Victim Restitution, Jurisdiction for Lawsuits Against Terrorist States, and Assistance to Victims of Terrorism.

Federal courts were authorized to order restitution for violent felonies against property including fraud, tampering with consumer products, or controlled substances offenses which involved physical injury or property loss. A single procedure for issuing these restitution orders was established, as was a set of procedures for payment and enforcement of restitution. Any special assessments that had been imposed as part of sentencing for felony convictions were increased.

Foreign governments which engage in torture, murder, aircraft sabotage, hostage taking, or providing material support for terrorist acts may be sued as the result of subsequent injury or death of American citizens. A ten year statute of limitations was established for such law suits.

Grants were provided to states to compensate and assist victims of terrorism. American residents who became victims of terrorism overseas were made eligible for compensation. Payment to a person who owed money for conviction in a federal crime was prohibited. Any criminal trial held more than 350 miles from where the events which are the subject of the trial occurred must be covered by closed circuit television.

Title III - International Terrorism Prohibitions

Title III established a procedure for defining foreign terrorist organizations as foreign organizations that engage in terrorist activities that threaten the national defense, foreign relations, or economic interests.

Furthermore, providing support to a terrorist organization except to provide medicine and religious materials was prohibited, as was providing any assistance to a country deemed a terrorist country.

Title IV - Terrorist and Criminal Alien Removal and Exclusion

Title IV has four subsections: Removal of Alien Terrorists, Exclusion of Members and Representatives of Terrorist Organizations, Modification to Asylum Procedures, and Criminal Alien Procedural Improvements.

A procedure was established for the removal of alien terrorists, and it was made a crime for those expelled as terrorists to reenter the country without the permission of the Attorney General.

Aliens may be denied entry to the United States on the grounds of being members of terrorist organizations. A procedure was established for those aliens who had been deported for unlawful entry to show that they had been lawfully admitted.

The Attorney General may not grant asylum to any alien terrorists unless there is no reason to consider the alien a threat to national security. A procedure was created for immigration officers to determine at the alien's point of entry whether or not to grant the alien asylum.

Certain confidential information concerning alien legalization may be disclosed if the information relates to an alien who has been killed, severely incapacitated, or is the subject of a criminal investigation. Certain immigration offenses were added to the list of Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization provisions. Law enforcement officials were allowed to use court-ordered wiretapping to investigate various immigration offences. State and local law enforcement officers are authorized to arrest and detain aliens unlawfully reentering the United States.

Reception

While those in favor of the bill say that the act prevents those convicted of crimes from "thwart[ing] justice and avoid[ing] just punishment by filing frivolous appeals for years on end,", critics argue that the inability to make multiple appeals increases the risk of an innocent person being killed.

See also

• Troy Anthony Davis
• Rice v. Collins
• Jimenez v. Quarterman

External links

• Text of the Act, also in PDF
• Timeline of Passage
• Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996: A Summary, Charles Doyle, American Law Division, Federation of American Scientists, June 3, 1996.

Online Article Sources

• http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/96-499.htm
• http://www.answers.com/topic/antiterrorism-and-effective-death-penalty-act-of-1996
• http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s104-735
• http://www.counterpunch.org/cassel1019.html
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOfD4qnG8fg
• Roper v. Weaver
• http://www.scotusblog.com/2005/05/is-aedpa-unconstitutional/
• http://www.enotes.com/major-acts-congress/antiterrorism-effective-death-penalty-act