Posted by Ilya Somin:
If You're Reading This, You're Probably a Federal Criminal:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_07_26-2009_08_01.shtml#1248668478


   Radley Balko has [1]an interesting post discussing the ever-expanding
   reach of federal criminal law. As he points out, the problem is not
   just that federal criminal law has expanded to cover many areas that
   are better left to state or local governments. It is that the scope of
   federal criminal law is so broad that the feds could probably find a
   crime to pin on almost any American adult.

   Judge Alex Kozinski and Misha Tseytlin have [2]an excellent essay
   entitled "You're (Probably) a Federal Criminal." As they put it, "most
   Americans are criminals, and don't know it, or suspect that they are
   but believe they'll never get prosecuted." You are a federal criminal
   if you have done any of the following: 1. Used any of the hundreds of
   substances banned by federal law, including smoking small amounts of
   marijuana and the like when you were in college. The last three
   presidents of the United States are all federal criminals under the
   drug laws, as are probably the majority of people who went to college
   in the last 40 years. Kozinski and Tseytlin cite statistics suggesting
   that nearly half of Americans have taken banned drugs at some point in
   their lives. The next presidential state of the union address should
   perhaps begin with "My fellow federal criminals," instead of the
   traditional "My fellow Americans." It would be a great teaching
   moment!

   2. Underpaid federal taxes (often even inadvertently). As even
   sophisticated players like certain Obama Administration officials have
   learned, the federal tax laws are often so complex and bvzantine that
   it's not hard to violate them by accident. If you do, there are often
   criminal penalties attached. 3. Cut corners in your business dealings.
   The federal mail and wire fraud statutes are so broad that
   [3]virtually sharp business practices can potentially be prosecuted as
   a federal crime. Indeed, as Kozinski and Tseytlin explain, the statute
   criminalizes actions that deprive employers or customers of "the
   intangible right to honest services," which in many cases leads to the
   imposition of criminal penalties on professionals who are guilty of
   nothing more than doing a poor job (sometimes in cases where their
   poor performance didn't cause any harm. 4. Mishandled supposedly
   dangerous substances or did a poor job of supervising workers who
   handled them. Federal regulations criminalizing such conduct often
   [4]punish people even if their actions didn't create any real danger
   to life, health or public safety. 5. Violated a wide range of
   miscellaneous federal regulations. There are far too many of these to
   list. Kozinski and Tseytlin discuss some of them. One example is the
   Lacey Act, which makes it a federal crime to violate a wide range of
   American and even foreign fishing and wildlife regulations. They note
   a case where a group of businessmen were imprisoned for violating an
   obscure Honduran fishing regulation that even the Honduran government
   claimed was invalid.

   The vast scope of federal criminal law is a very serious problem.
   Because of it, most Americans are effectively at the mercy of federal
   officials whenever they might choose to come after us. We are used to
   thinking of "criminals" as a small subset of the population. In that
   happy state of affairs, criminal law threatens only a small number of
   people, most of whom have committed genuinely heinous acts. But when
   we are all federal criminals, perfectly ordinary citizens can easily
   get swept up in the net simply by being unlucky or because they ran
   afoul of federal prosecutors or other influential officials.
   Overcriminalization also leads to the longterm imprisonment of
   hundreds of thousands of nonviolent people (mostly as a result of the
   War on Drugs, but many for other reasons as well) who haven't caused
   any harm to the person or property of others. Some [5]55% of all
   federal prisoners are nonviolent drug offenders. In addition, the
   ability to convict almost anyone of a federal crime means that federal
   officials have wide discretion to punish people who are unpopular,
   politically weak, run afoul of the current administration, or
   otherwise become tempting targets. Tellingly, the people who get
   imprisoned for nonviolent drug offenses are mostly poor and lacking in
   political influence, while middle class people who do similar things
   are less likely to be singled out by federal prosecutors.

   To me, the amazing thing is not that federal prosecutors sometimes
   abuse their enormous powers, but that they don't do so far more often.
   However, as federal criminal law continues to expand, it will be more
   and dangerous to keep relying on their self-restraint or that of the
   Department of Justice.

   These dangers are not unique to federal law. State criminal law has
   been expanded too far as well. However, states that overcriminalize
   risk losing people who [6]"vote with their feet" either because they
   fear imprisonment or because they don't want to pay the high taxes
   needed to finance an overgrown criminal justice and law enforcement
   system. It is far more difficult to escape the feds. It is, therefore,
   no accident that the vast majority of federal prisoners are either
   nonviolent drug offenders or people who commit regulatory "crimes,"
   while[7] 72% of state prisoners have committed either violent offenses
   (53%) or property crimes (19%). Overbroad state criminal law is a
   menace. The fact that we are all federal criminals is even worse.

References

   1. http://reason.com/blog/#135036
   2. 
http://books.google.com/books?id=Tu5RB6YHf10C&dq=lynch+in+the+name+of+justice&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=51Ya4U8XFt&sig=5RvEjlBhHFCg9J-Cp_BnV0akzV4&hl=en&ei=eR1tSuyVK4GktgeUlpCJDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1
   3. 
http://law.jrank.org/pages/1574/Mail-Federal-Mail-Fraud-Act-Challenges-constitutionality-act.html
   4. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/07/21/heritage-house-law/
   5. http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2008_06_22-2008_06_28.shtml#1214680020
   6. http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_03_29-2009_04_04.shtml#1238895120
   7. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
Volokh@lists.powerblogs.com
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh

Reply via email to