context: Given the obvious constraints on the usefulness of legislative history as an indicator of Congress's collective purpose, this prong by itself is not determinative in the absence of "unmistakable evidence of punitive intent."
citation_a.signal: cf.
citation_a.identifier: 97 S.Ct. 2808, 2808-09
citation_a.parenthetical: finding no bill of attainder where the relevant committee reports "cast no aspersions on appellant's personal conduct and contained] no condemnation of his behavior as meriting the infliction of punishment"
citation_a.sentence: See Lovett, 328 U.S. at 312, 314, 66 S.Ct. at 1077, 1078 (finding an employment ban to constitute a bill of attainder where committee reports characterized the affected persons as “subversive” and “unfit” for government service); cf. Nixon, 433 U.S. at 479, 97 S.Ct. at 2808-09 (finding no bill of attainder where the relevant committee reports “cast no aspersions on appellant’s personal conduct and contained] no condemnation of his behavior as meriting the infliction of punishment”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 328 U.S. 312, 312, 314
citation_b.parenthetical: finding an employment ban to constitute a bill of attainder where committee reports characterized the affected persons as "subversive" and "unfit" for government service
citation_b.sentence: See Lovett, 328 U.S. at 312, 314, 66 S.Ct. at 1077, 1078 (finding an employment ban to constitute a bill of attainder where committee reports characterized the affected persons as “subversive” and “unfit” for government service); cf. Nixon, 433 U.S. at 479, 97 S.Ct. at 2808-09 (finding no bill of attainder where the relevant committee reports “cast no aspersions on appellant’s personal conduct and contained] no condemnation of his behavior as meriting the infliction of punishment”).