Senate Passes Crime Victims’ Bill

WASHINGTON —  The Senate on Thursday overwhelmingly approved legislation assuring that crime victims would have specific rights in court cases after sponsors determined that their efforts to pass a constitutional amendment on the issue would fail yet again.

The legislation would ensure that crime victims were notified of court proceedings, told when defendants were released and informed that they were allowed to speak at sentencing hearings.

“The scales of justice are today out of balance,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who with Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) had struggled for eight years to pass an amendment to the Constitutional that would put victims on the same legal footing as defendants in criminal trials.

But stymied in their efforts to amend the Constitution -- even with President Bush’s support -- Feinstein and Kyl instead decided to pursue a change in federal law.

The result was a 96-1 Senate vote to approve the measure, with the House soon expected to follow suit and Bush expected to sign the measure into law.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) had scheduled a test vote on the proposed amendment Wednesday.

But when it became clear it had little chance of passage, sponsors decided to use legislation to achieve their goals.

The bill was passed one day after it was introduced.

Because the measure would be a federal statute instead of a constitutional amendment, it would apply only to criminal cases in federal courts -- not state courts, where most violent crimes are tried.

Unlike the proposed constitutional amendment, which would have applied only to victims of violent crimes, the federal statute would apply to victims of all federal crimes, including white-collar offenses.

The measure approved Thursday was named after five crime victims, including two from Southern California -- Louarna Gillis, 22, of Alhambra, who was abducted and killed in 1979; and Scott Campbell, 27, of Anaheim, who was slain and thrown from an airplane over the Pacific Ocean in 1982.

Feinstein said that Gillis’ family had not been notified of critical proceedings in the case and Campbell’s family had not been permitted in the courtroom.

The measure would guarantee crime victims the right to receive “reasonable” and “timely” notice of court proceedings and of the defendant’s release or escape from custody; to attend and be heard at proceedings involving a release, plea or sentencing; to confer with the prosecutor handling the case; to “full and timely” restitution; and to proceedings “free from unreasonable delay.” The bill authorizes $122 million in spending for victims’ programs.

A constitutional crime victims amendment -- proposed as far back as 1982 by a task force appointed by President Reagan -- ran into opposition from members of both parties, who questioned the necessity of an amendment on such a specific issue.

Passing a constitutional amendment, which requires a two-thirds vote of the House and the Senate and then the approval of three-fourths of the state legislatures, is a difficult proposition.

All states have laws guaranteeing some rights to victims, although they are not uniform. California’s far-reaching victims’ bill of rights initiative was approved by voters in 1982.

Terry Ann Schroeder, a legislative analyst for the American Civil Liberties Union, welcomed the decision to leave the Constitution alone, but expressed concern that the measure “still injects raw emotion into what should be as calm and rational a process as possible, and it threatens to block prosecutorial actions necessary to put really dangerous criminals behind bars.”

She said she was worried about provisions that would allow victims to speak at bail hearings without being put under oath or being subject to cross-examination.

Schroeder said the ACLU also was concerned about a provision that would allow victims to sit in the courtroom throughout the trial.

“If they are going to be a witness, it could certainly taint or bias their testimony,” she said.

The measure drew the support of political opposites, such as conservative Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) and liberal Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.).

The lone dissenting vote was cast by Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D-S.C.).