As the scenario presented by my colleague from Kentucky demonstrates, the unjustified use of strict liability statutes is plainly undermining the very objectives which OPA90 sought to achieve, namely to enhance the prevention of and response to oil spills in Louisiana and elsewhere in the United States. As we are well aware, tremendous time, effort, and resources have been expended by both the federal government and the maritime industry to eliminate oil spills to the maximum extent possible, an to plan for and undertake an immediate and effective response to mitigate any environmental damage from spills that do occur. Clearly unwarranted and improper prosecutorial use of strict liability statutes will have a "chilling" effect on these cooperative spill prevention and response efforts. Indeed, even if we were to believe that criminal prosecution only follows intentional criminal conduct, the mere fact that strict criminal liability statutes are available at the prosecutor's discretion will intimidate even the most innocent and careful operator.
John B. Breaux: “As the scenario presented by my colleague from Kentucky demonstrates, the unjustified use of strict liability statutes…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the impact of strict liability statutes on oil spill prevention and response efforts.
Share
More from John B. Breaux
I will even go along with saying you can bring it back at 5 percent, if you are going to use it for job creation or research and development, for capital expenditures. And If you are going to use it to rebuild your pension fund for…
I wonder if anybody in this body remembers Enron. Let's trust that they are going to do right. They are a U.S. corporation that created more tax shelters than the IRS could count. It took a group of Philadelphia lawyers 2 months to even…
It says if Congress passes this, we will veto it. It is very clear. The administration says the new FCC local and national media ownership rules more accurately reflect the changing media landscape and current state of network station…
it is interesting that the authors, the Senators who oppose the amendment, say the bill is going to create 660,000 jobs. If it is going to create 660,000 jobs, there is no problem. The people would be able to bring the money back and pay 5…