Jay Rockefeller: “This list sets the precedents and authorities supporting the constitutionality of requiring judges to determine the…”

“This list sets the precedents and authorities supporting the constitutionality of requiring judges to determine the amount of punitive damages. And is therefore valuable information to be considered in this debate. I rely on the word and the integrity of the Associate Attorney General and his staff at the President's Justice Department. They believe, as I have indicated, that a freestanding judge additur provision as it is written in the Gorton-Rockefeller amendment, and we would like to modify it by striking section 107(b)(3)(C), passes constitutional muster. I have said that several times purposely. In my view, as an author of this legislation, that is sufficient authority to say that a severability amendment regarding additur is superfluous. To reiterate, relying on the Justice Department's determination that a judge additur provision is constitutional, I do not believe it is necessary to further amend this provision to sever the judge additur requirements of this bill in an effort to guard against a circumstance where this provision would be deemed unconstitutional. It will not be deemed unconstitutional for the reasons I have articulated. Mr. President, I just want to take this opportunity to make my colleagues aware that we have, in fact, addressed the concerns raised about constitutionality. The judge additur provision, coupled with the modification that strikes the defendant's right to a new trial, is a constitutional provision.”