NCJ Number
79457
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 72 Issue: 3 Dated: (Fall 1981) Pages: 914-954
Date Published
1981
Length
41 pages
Annotation
This article examines the bills that have been proposed by Congress to comprehensively revise Federal criminal law and comments on their compatibility with the goals of having a criminal code that presents a coherent approach to crime and punishment while rigorously enforcing the limits of Government power mandated by the Bill of Rights and our strong civil liberties traditions.
Abstract
In 1973, S. 1 was proposed, but it would have expanded the criminal law in ways that cut deeply into constitutional rights. Fortunately, S. 1 was not enacted. Another bill, S. 1437, passed by the Senate in 1978, defined crimes more broadly than in current law and impinged on first amendment freedoms. This bill also failed to be enacted. In June 1980, the House Judiciary Committee reported bill H.R. 6915, which retained the substance of current law and made a few reforms which enhanced civil liberties. The Senate proceeded on a course entirely different from the House and processed S. 1722, which was a revised version of S. 1437. S. 1722 would have improved the criminal laws and would have protected civil liberties, but also would have expanded the powers of Government investigators and prosecutors at the expense of civil liberties. On the positive side, S. 1722 would have eliminated or mitigated several objectionable features of S. 1437, such as a comprehensive solicitation provision, a proposed new crime of failing to obey a public safety order, and a substantially expanded crime of extortion. In some sections, it would have codified judicial decisions favorable to civil liberties. A variety of issues emerge as the major civil liberties problems in S. 1722, including Government appeal of sentences, pretrial release, sentencing, jurisdiction over crimes on energy facilities, and obstructing a Government function by physical interference. Other sensitive areas are conspiracy, attempt, false oral statements, obstructing proceedings by disorderly conduct, hindering law enforcement, and riot and obscenity. The article discusses these issues in detail and concludes that the failure of the legislation to reach enactment should not be deplored. A total of 309 footnotes are included.