NY Democrats Split on Legislation to Close 'Double Jeopardy Loophole'
Now lawmakers are working with the office of New York Attorney General Letitia James—a major proponent of the legislation—to likely amend the bill a second time before it's approved in both chambers.
April 08, 2019 at 06:52 PM
5 minute read
Legislation that would allow associates or family members of President Donald Trump to be brought up on state charges by prosecutors in New York after receiving a federal pardon has hit a snag after some Democrats in the state Legislature were unwilling to support it as written.
Now lawmakers are working with the office of New York Attorney General Letitia James—a major proponent of the legislation—to likely amend the bill a second time before it's approved in both chambers.
The bill would close the so-called “double jeopardy loophole” in New York, which prohibits state prosecutors from bringing state charges against someone pardoned of federal crimes based on the same set of facts. It was first introduced last year by State Sen. Todd Kaminsky, D-Nassau, and Assemblyman Joseph Lentol, D-Brooklyn.
After stalling last year, it was reintroduced in January and appeared to be gaining momentum last month when James and lawmakers announced an amended version of the legislation that was expected to pass soon after. Instead, lawmakers tabled the bill to focus on the state budget.
That changed Monday when the legislation cleared a major hurdle in the Senate by passing the codes committee, which typically reviews legislation that would change the state criminal procedure law. There was no debate on the bill in the committee, despite it being considered among the more controversial pieces of legislation lawmakers may take up during the remainder of this year's session.
Kaminsky, a former federal prosecutor who helped craft the new version, lauded the committee's approval in a statement after it passed. It will now go to another committee before coming to the Senate floor for a vote.
“We are one step closer to ensuring New Yorkers get the justice they deserve in their own courts, even if the president tries to intervene on behalf of friends, family, or cronies,” Kaminsky said. “I applaud the Senate's Codes Committee for advancing this critical legislation. Now the full Senate and Assembly must act—and quickly—to ensure the double jeopardy loophole is closed before any presidential pardons rob New Yorkers of their right to justice.”
A spokeswoman for James said they're looking forward to seeing the legislation through to passage after it cleared the codes committee Monday.
“This vote is an important step in our efforts to ensure that justice cannot be evaded because of a loophole in our laws. We look forward to the passage of this bill,” the spokeswoman said.
But the bill isn't expected to get the same treatment in the Assembly anytime soon. Lentol, who chairs the codes committee in that chamber, said the bill was not well received when he discussed it with other Democrats in the chamber last month.
“We conferenced the bill before we did the budget and most of our Democratic members were opposed to it,” Lentol said. “They weren't really receptive to the idea. So it's kind of in limbo right now.”
Some members were concerned about how narrowly the bill focused in on Trump, his family and his close associates, Lentol said. The bill is written in a way that would only allow state charges to be brought against a pardoned individual with direct ties to Trump, either through his family, their work on his campaign, or their work in the White House.
Those objections come with a shade of irony; Democrats opposed the legislation last year because they argued it was written too broadly at the time. The initial bill would have allowed state prosecutors to bring charges against just about anybody pardoned of a federal crime, which some said could backfire during future administrations.
Now, Lentol said, members were concerned the legislation would be perceived as being written to specifically target Trump and his associates. That's not necessarily untrue—the bill was inspired by Trump. But both Kaminsky and Lentol have said it would be good policy to have in place regardless of who's in the oval office.
“Most of them had fairly sound objections to it—it looks like we're targeting Trump with the way we proposed the new bill, the other bill was more general in its scope,” Lentol said. “So we tried to narrow it and in narrowing it I think we made a mistake. I know the Codes [Committee] staff has been working with the attorney general, I hope, to make some changes.”
There have also been concerns about the political implications of the legislation going into next year's election cycle, Lentol said. Some Democrats in districts that could flip during any given election were concerned that passing a bill seen to specifically target Trump could cost them their district.
“I think that's what made it more objectionable than before, that people in the conference were thinking it looked like we were just targeting the guy, and that it might be hurtful in the elections, and especially for members who have close elections,” Lentol said.
It's unclear how members will reach a middle ground on the legislation at this point, but Lentol said they will continue to work toward a solution that could win support from the conference. They'll leave Albany after this week for a short break and return at the end of the month to resume the final two months of this year's legislative session, which ends in June.
READ MORE:
NY Lawmakers Introduce New Language to Close 'Double Jeopardy Loophole'
NY Lawmakers Expected to Pass Bill Closing Double Jeopardy Loophole
Double Jeopardy Worries Loom Over NY State Charges Against Manafort
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRelaxing Penalties on Discovery Noncompliance Allows Criminal Cases to Get Decided on Merit
5 minute readBipartisan Lawmakers to Hochul Urge Greater Student Loan Forgiveness for Public-Interest Lawyers
'Playing the Clock'?: Hochul Says NY's Discovery Loophole Is to Blame for Wide Dismissal of Criminal Cases
So Who Won? Congestion Pricing Ruling Leaves Both Sides Claiming Victory, Attorneys Seeking Clarification
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Dismisses Defamation Suit by New York Philharmonic Oboist Accused of Sexual Misconduct
- 2California Court Denies Apple's Motion to Strike Allegations in Gender Bias Class Action
- 3US DOJ Threatens to Prosecute Local Officials Who Don't Aid Immigration Enforcement
- 4Kirkland Is Entering a New Market. Will Its Rates Get a Warm Welcome?
- 5African Law Firm Investigated Over ‘AI-Generated’ Case References
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250