Citations (5)


Footnotes (322)



Barbarians at the Gates? A Reply to the Critics of the Victims' Rights Amendment

Paul G. Cassell

University of Utah - S.J. Quinney College of Law

Utah Law Review, 1999

The next Amendment to our Constitution will likely be the Victims' Rights Amendment, which provides a bill of rights for victims of crime. As the amendment has moved closer to passage, its critics have raised various objections. This article responds to the critics, concluding that the Victims' Rights Amendment would properly recognize victims' compelling interests in the criminal justice process. Part I of the article reviews normative objections to the Amendment, concluding that the amendment will harm neither the legitimate interests of defendants nor prosecutors. For example, victims can be given the right to make "impact" statements at sentencing without harming the fairness of the process. Part II responds to those who have argued that the amendment is "unnecessary," explaining the undeniable practical problems that victims face in attempting to secure their rights without federal constitutional protection. Part III turns to structural objections to the amendment, explaining why the protection of the rights of victims to participate in the criminal justice process is an appropriate subject for a constitutional amendment.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 65

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: September 15, 1999  

Suggested Citation

Cassell, Paul G., Barbarians at the Gates? A Reply to the Critics of the Victims' Rights Amendment. Utah Law Review, 1999. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=174649 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.174649

Contact Information

Paul G. Cassell (Contact Author)
University of Utah - S.J. Quinney College of Law ( email )
383 S. University Street
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0730
United States
801-585-5202 (Phone)
801-581-6897 (Fax)

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,927
Downloads: 209
Download Rank: 115,212
Citations:  5
Footnotes:  322