An AIG Bill of Attainder?

Ex post facto law? Wrong. The issue with passing a law "reclaiming" the AIG bonuses is really a BILL OF ATTAINDER. When people speak of ex post facto laws, they speak of retroactive criminalization. Bills of attainder, however, punish a particular person or class of persons without due process. It is axiomatic that punishment in the US means deprivation of liberty and/or property. People often confuse the two because they are contained in the same clause in the US Constitution.

The irony here is that this issue has not been brought up since the seventies. American society thought bills of attainder were ancient history. Now, they are front and center in not only the AIG bonus issue, but the Guantanamo Commissions as well [see here, here, and here]. The Gitmo detainees' attorneys claim their clients are being subjected to a bill of attainder because the MCA punishes the detainees as a class of persons. Here is the crux of the irony, the MCA at least sets up a procedure whereby the accused can confront their accusers and witnesses, can benefit from free defense counsel, has the right to see all evidence that will be introduced against them, has the benefit of getting all exculpatory evidence, and will be judged by a neutral panel of highly trained professionals. By that standard, the AIG employees are being treated WORSE than the detainees at Gitmo.