How would one feel if one was convicted for a crime without a jury, or even being put on trial twice for the same crime? These two situations canhappen through a bill of attainder and the ex post facto laws. Bill of attainder is basically being convicted of a crime without a jury while ex post facto being put on jury twice. Although the bill of attainder and the ex post facto laws exist, there are also laws in the bill of rights that say that these things are illegal. The sixth and fifth amendment in the bill of rightsstate that a person has theright to only be convicted once and to have a jury trial. While the sixth amendment states that one has the right to a speedy trial by jury and a lawyer, thebill of attainder declares a personguilty of a crime that they have not been put on trial for.The bill of attainder contradicts the sixth amendment completely. …show more content…
The bill of attainder violates the natural rights of the accused by not giving them a speedy trial with a jury. The sixth amendment was put in place to fairlypunish the accused and to make all punishments legit. Although the bill of attainder violates the bill of rights, under Article 1 section 9 of the constitution, the bill of attainder is ban.The fifth amendment states that there shall be no double jeopardy under any circumstances. Yet,Ex post facto law states that after the fact of the crime, a law could be made to make it illegal and make a person who has already been convicted have more punishment than they initially did.Like the bill of attainder, under article 1 section 9 in the constitution, expost facto laws are ban. These laws are ban because it is a violation of the natural rights that Americans are given. Ones natural rights state that there shall be no cruel or unusual punishments, and committing a person twice seems like and unusual