"Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community." James Madison, Federalist Number 44, 1788.
Please explain how allowing appeal of Terri's case to a federal court - - without dictating any outcome in that court - - constitutes a bill of attainder, an ex post facto law, or an impairment of contract. It's none of those things. It's simly allowing another level of judicial review of a particular case, without ordaining any particular judicial outcome.
nothing new under the sun, it looks like.