Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5662-5664)
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 10, 1993
Bill to enforce the fourteenth amendment and to reform habeas corpus - Amends the Federal judicial code to impose a 180-day limitations period for the filing of Federal habeas corpus petitions, applicable in both capital and non-capital cases in which the State has offered the petitioner counsel for State post-conviction review, which begins from the time the petitioner's conviction becomes final on State direct review. Tolls such period while the petitioner pursues State post-conviction remedies, unless the petitioner fails to initiate post-conviction review within specified time frames. Provides for a one-time 60-day extension of the period upon a showing of good cause. (Sec. 303) Provides an automatic stay of execution in capital cases through the consideration of the first Federal habeas corpus petition. Permits a stay of execution to be granted thereafter only if the petition on its face satisfies the requirements for successive petitions. (Sec. 304) Requires that in Federal habeas corpus proceedings: (1) all claims be governed by the law as it was when the petitioner's conviction became final; and (2) a court consider intervening decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court which establish fundamental constitutional rights. Codifies case law providing for an independent Federal habeas corpus review of claims under Federal law, except for fourth amendment exclusionary rule claims. Specifies that the State bears the burden of proving harmless error in Federal habeas corpus review of State criminal convictions. (Sec. 305) Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) limits on successive petitions (allows a prisoner to bring a second or subsequent petition only upon a showing of cause for not having brought the claim before and prejudice if the claim is not heard, subject to specified restrictions); and (2) new evidence (allows prisoners in capital cases to present claims of actual innocence based on newly discovered evidence that the petitioner did not previously know about). (Sec. 308) Sets forth: (1) time requirements for consideration by district courts, and by courts of appeals of district court determinations, of habeas corpus petitions in capital cases; (2) provisions regarding the exhaustion of collateral remedies requirement in capital cases; and (3) standards and procedures for the provision of counsel for indigent defendants at all stages of State capital litigation. Requires each State in which a sentence of death may be imposed to establish a State counsel certification authority, comprised of members of the State's criminal defense bar, to create a roster of qualified lawyers eligible for court appointment and monitor the performance of attorneys so certified. (Sec. 312) Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to require the Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance to make grants to States to help fund the provision of defense counsel. Authorizes: (1) Federal grants of up to 75 percent of the additional costs imposed by the new counsel requirements during the first three years following enactment of this Act and 50 percent thereafter; and (2) grants for the prosecution of Federal habeas corpus cases in an amount equal to that allocated to capital resource centers. (Sec. 313) Abrogates State sovereign immunity from suit in Federal court for a violation of specified provisions regarding the establishment of a State certification authority and attorney compensation.
Source last updated: Jun 2, 2021. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.1657 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.1657 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.1657 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.1657 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.