This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Should US laws have expiration dates?
There are a number of laws that are passed in this country and that over time with the change of issues importance become less relevant or irrelevant yet remain on the books unless actively repealed. Would it be better to have laws automatically be reviewed every 10 or 20 or even 50 years? Should the sitting congress not renew them, or the sitting president not sign them then they would no longer be in effect. What laws would be exempted from this if any? What laws would you wish to see with such a expiration date? Why? Why do you not like / like this idea?
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.














John Smith 30+
Paul Kirhagis
As far as putting expiration dates on laws I think that is a slippery slope. I think a required review of the body of law at regular intervals would be a better course of action.
John Smith 30+
Paul Kirhagis
Also reviewing law would serve to show holes or areas of law that are necessary and are not currently on the books. My initial thought was regarding prescription pain pill abuse. The law is seriously lacking in proper punishments for people that abuse such substances. Just one example of how a review of law could serve to bring that law more in line with the times.
As an aside, I disagree that right and wrong is a black and white concept that "enlightened" men and women should be able to write legislation regarding any issue with no problems. The grey area between right and wrong is often seriously difficult to navigate and when legislators inevitably get it wrong sometimes (they are human after all) it's not an issue of incompetence, its an issue of their own humanity. This applies to voters as well. A review of the law as society evolves will serve to revisit some of these issues and allow congress to reconsider their previous actions. I think this would serve the nation quite well.