The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E1943 on Oct. 7, 1997.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1943]
[[Page E1943]]
DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998
______
speech of
HON. SANDER M. LEVIN
of michigan
in the house of representatives
Tuesday, September 30, 1997
The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2267) making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes:
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Hyde amendment to the Commerce-Justice-State appropriation.
In Committee there was a provision added that would have allowed Members of Congress and their staffs to be reimbursed for legal costs in cases where they were the prevailing party against the Federal Government, unless a court found that the Government's case was
``substantially justified or that other special circumstances would make an award unjust.''
Under this provision, the burden of proof would be placed on Government prosecutors who would not only have to prove that there was probable cause a crime had been committed, but also that they were substantially justified in bringing the case to trial.
It was my intention to vote for an amendment to completely strike the committee language from the bill. Unfortunately, the Congress was not given an opportunity to vote on such an amendment.
Instead the Congress considered the Hyde amendment. This amendment took a questionable approach to a handful of cases involving Congress and sought to apply it to all cases prosecuted by the Government. This would open the Government up to a flood of litigation every time it lost a case, regardless of the circumstances.
It was a bad idea for cases involving Congress and it's an exponentially worse when it's extended to everyone else. The fact is that if this provision were to become law, the Department of Justice would choose not to pursue difficult, but legitimate, criminal cases such as those involving rape and child molestation.
____________________
