ShareTweetWhatsAppPinShareEmail0 Share
Most laws are meant to apply broadly, to individuals, businesses, or at least a specific category of people. But every now and then, governments skip this step entirely and pass laws with a specific category of citizens in mind.
These aren't hypothetical examples or bizarre local regulations that formally affect only one resident. These are real acts of parliament, legislature, and government that singled out a specific person by name or with such precision that there was never any doubt who the target was. Some were aimed at dispossession. Some stripped people of power or rights. Some resulted in execution. One, much more pleasantly, resulted in a pension.
A more heinous version of this practice even has a name: the outlawry act, whereby the legislature effectively punishes an individual without the usual legal process. The U.S. Constitution ultimately banned this practice at both the federal and state levels, in part because history had already demonstrated what can happen when a legislature decides it's also a courtroom.
The following laws show what happens when governments stop making rules for everyone and start making them for the one person they actually have something to say to.
See also: 10 Incredible Cases Where Laws Had Unintended Consequences
10. In Athens, a playwright was fined for bringing the audience to tears.
The Siege of Miletus: The Greek Tragedy That Changed History… | The God of Cunning
In 494 BC, the Persian army captured Miletus after suppressing the Ionian Revolt. The city was an ally of Athens, which had supported the revolt, so the catastrophe was still fresh when the playwright Phrynichus decided to turn it into a tragedy.
Soon after, he put «The Capture of Miletus» . According to Herodotus, the audience burst into tears. Usually, bringing an entire theater to tears is considered a very successful evening for a tragedian.
The Athenians saw things differently.
Phrynichus was fined 1,000 drachmas for reminding them of their own misfortunes and ordered never to perform his play again. The punishment was directed against one playwright and one specific production. Athens effectively decided that Phrynichus had committed an unforgivable crime by forcing people to reflect on what they desperately wanted to forget.
This is one of the strangest examples in ancient times of a government singling out an artist and his work for punishment. Apparently, even in the birthplace of democracy there were limits, especially when audiences left the theater in tears.[1]
9. Rome passes a law banishing Cicero by name.
Expulsion of Cicero, 58 BC.
Publius Clodius Pulcher had problems with Cicero, and being a Roman politician, he found a perfectly normal solution: to pass a law designed to destroy him.
The troubles began with the Catiline conspiracy in 63 BC. Cicero, then consul, executed five Roman citizens without formal trial for their alleged involvement in the plot. His supporters hailed him as the savior of the Republic. His enemies spent the next few years searching for a way to make him regret his actions.
In 58 BC, Clodius, now tribune of the plebs, passed a law mandating exile for anyone found guilty of executing a Roman citizen without trial. Cicero's name wasn't mentioned, but there was little doubt who was to be executed. He fled Rome before the law was passed.
Then Clodius dropped the subtleties. The second decision bluntly declared Cicero guilty, officially confirmed his exile, confiscated his property, and forbade anyone within hundreds of miles of Rome from granting him asylum. Cicero's house on the Palatine was demolished, and Clodius dedicated a shrine to Liberty on the site.
The following year, the political situation changed. Another law was passed, returning Cicero to Rome in September 57 BC after an absence of approximately 18 months, where he was greeted with great hospitality.
Rome managed to exile one of its most famous politicians by passing a law that was essentially devoted to the question of how miserable Cicero's life should be.[2]
8. England executed the minister whom it could not convict.
Thomas Wentworth: The first casualty of the English Civil War.
Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, was King Charles I's most influential adviser and one of the most hated men in England. Parliament eventually decided that mere hostility toward him was no longer enough. They wanted him dead.
In 1641, Parliament attempted to impeach Strafford for treason, accusing him of attempting to establish an arbitrary government and use military force against the king's subjects. The problem was that Strafford had mounted a fairly effective defense, making proving treason under the usual procedure increasingly uncertain.
So parliament changed tactics.
The bill contained "An Act for the Conviction of Thomas, Earl of Strafford, for High Treason." Instead of asking the court to find Strafford guilty, Parliament would simply pass a law declaring this specific individual a traitor and liable to death.
Both Houses approved the disinheritance of the monarchy. Charles I resisted, having personally promised Strafford protection, but mounting political pressure eventually broke him. Strafford himself reportedly advised the king to consent, lest he further endanger the monarchy.
Charles gave his approval on 10 May 1641. Two days later, Strafford was beheaded on Tower Hill.
Parliament has found a surprisingly effective solution to its legal problem: if a person cannot be convicted under an existing law, it is enough to simply pass a new law to obtain a conviction.[3]
7. Parliament changed the rules for the execution of Sir John Fenwick.
The First Jacobite Rebellion of 1689 | A Documentary on Total War
In 1696, the English government believed it had captured a dangerous Jacobite conspirator. Sir John Fenwick was implicated in a plot to restore the deposed James II, and two witnesses were prepared to testify against him.
This was significant because English treason law required two witnesses.
Then one of them disappeared.
Cardell Goodman, one of those scheduled to testify, disappeared before Fenwick could be brought to trial. Suddenly, the prosecution was left with only one useful witness, and a serious problem arose. Under standard criminal procedure, they might no longer be able to convict him.
Parliament decided that it did not need the usual rules.
The government introduced a bill entitled "An Act for the Conviction of Sir John Fenwick, Bart., of High Treason." The treason bill did not require Parliament to adhere to the same rules of evidence as would be required for a treason trial. After heated debate, the House of Commons and the House of Lords approved it, and Fenwick was legally found guilty.
He was beheaded on Tower Hill on 28 January 1697.
Fenwick may have escaped a simple conviction because the law required two witnesses. In response, Parliament passed a law that did not provide for a single trial.[4]
6. In Great Britain, a law was passed regarding Napoleon's imprisonment.
Napoleon vs. Britain: Europe 1809–1812
After Napoleon fled from Elba in 1815, returned to France, regained his throne, and began the campaign that ended at Waterloo, Britain was naturally reluctant to try again to implement the plan to retire to a small island.
This time, Napoleon was sent much further, to the remote British island of Saint Helena in the South Atlantic. But after the war ended, an awkward legal question arose: on what basis could Britain continue to hold him indefinitely?
Parliament's response was surprisingly concrete.
In 1816, the government introduced a bill whose purpose was clearly stated in its title: "An Act for the More Effective Detention of Napoleon Bonaparte." During the debate, ministers made it clear that the target of this measure was Napoleon himself and that they did not intend to allow the detention of his comrades who had followed him to Saint Helena.
The law provided the legal basis for Napoleon's continued detention. It allowed the crown to determine the conditions necessary for his safe custody. Unlike the Treaty of Fontainebleau, which granted Napoleon sovereignty over Elba, this agreement did not provide for the creation of a miniature empire or a second chance to resign.
Napoleon remained on Saint Helena until his death in 1821.
After one spectacular escape, Britain apparently decided that ordinary legal principles weren't enough. If Europe's most troublesome former emperor needed his own law to keep him on the island, Parliament was happy to write one.[5]
5. Parliament condemned the Duke even before he was caught.
The most unfortunate execution in England was that of the Duke of Monmouth.
In June 1685, James Scott, Duke of Monmouth, landed in southwest England and led a rebellion against King James II. Monmouth was the illegitimate but popular son of Charles II, and his supporters hoped to place the Protestant duke on the throne in place of his Catholic uncle.
Traditionally, before the government could convict a rebel of treason, he had to be captured. Parliament decided this process was too lengthy.
During the period of open rebellion in Monmouth, the Act of Attainder of the Duke of Monmouth 1685 was passed. The statute mentioned his name personally and declared him "found guilty of high treason" and liable to death and forfeiture of his property.
In other words, Parliament condemned Monmouth before anyone had caught him.
The law received royal assent on June 16. Monmouth's rebellion was crushed at the Battle of Sedgemoor on July 6, and he was captured two days later while hiding in a ditch. Since Parliament had already passed a guilty verdict and death penalty, there was no need for a trial for treason.
Monmouth was beheaded on Tower Hill on 15 July.
Most wanted men have to worry about what will happen if they are captured. Monmouth had the unusual experience of knowing that Parliament had already passed a law declaring the answer to that question.[6]
4. Henry VIII condemns Thomas Cromwell by Act of Parliament.
Thomas Cromwell: Henry VIII's Accomplice 💰 The Tyrant King | Smithsonian Channel
Thomas Cromwell spent many years helping Henry VIII transform England. As the king's chief minister, he played a central role in the break with Rome, the dissolution of the monasteries, and the vast expansion of royal power. Unfortunately for Cromwell, his service to Henry VIII did not come with a pension.
By 1540, Cromwell's enemies at court had won the king's favor. In June, he was arrested during a meeting of the Privy Council and sent to the Tower of London on charges of treason and heresy.
He never received a regular criminal trial.
Instead, Parliament passed a private act specifically dedicated to him: "An Act for the Outlawry of Thomas, Lord Cromwell." The legislation declared Cromwell a traitor and heretic, stripped him of his property and office, and authorized the king to determine the manner of his death.
It was a particularly grim end for a man who had spent years helping Henry use Parliament to further royal policy. Cromwell was executed on July 28, 1540—the same day Henry married his fifth wife, Catherine Howard.
Henry had raised Cromwell from a relatively humble position to become one of the most powerful men in England. When he wanted to remove him, Parliament passed a law to that effect.[7]
3. Parliament deprives Edward VIII of the throne.
Why did King Edward VIII abdicate the throne?
In December 1936, Great Britain faced a constitutional problem unforeseen by any ordinary statute. King Edward VIII wanted to marry Wallis Simpson, an American divorcee whose second divorce had not yet been finalized. His government vehemently opposed the marriage, and Edward decided he would rather abdicate than give her up.
On December 10, Edward signed the Act of Abdication, announcing his irrevocable decision to renounce the throne.
But the king could not simply resign by writing a letter and walking away.
Therefore, Parliament passed the His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act 1936, specifically to give legal effect to Edward's decision. The law was remarkably straightforward: upon receiving royal assent, Edward ceased to be king, the crown passed to the next claimant to the throne, and Edward, as well as any future descendants, lost their rights to the succession.
The law came into force on December 11. Edward VIII immediately ceased to be king, and his younger brother became George VI.
Most laws regulate what ordinary people can and cannot do. This law existed because exactly one man needed parliament's help to quit one of the most difficult jobs in the world.[8]
2. Congress confiscated Richard Nixon's presidential papers.
Is the President Above the Law? | The United States vs. Nixon
When Richard Nixon resigned as president on August 9, 1974, he didn't completely leave behind the Watergate scandal. He also left behind thousands of hours of secretly taped White House conversations and mountains of presidential documents that could contain evidence of abuses of power.
At the time, presidential papers were generally considered the personal property of the former president. Nixon entered into an agreement with the General Services Administration that allowed him to retain significant control over his materials and even provided for the destruction of the records after a certain period or upon his death.
Congress had other plans.
In December 1974, the Presidential Records and Materials Preservation Act was passed. Unlike the later Presidential Records Act, which established regulations for future administrations, the 1974 law applied only to the presidential records of Richard Nixon.
The federal government took custody of Nixon's tapes and documents, preserved materials related to the Watergate scandal and abuses of power, and developed procedures for subsequent public access. Materials of purely private value were to be segregated and returned.
Nixon challenged this law, arguing, among other things, that Congress had improperly singled it out from others. However, in 1977, the US Supreme Court upheld the law's validity.
Congress later created a general system regulating presidential records. But first, it passed legislation targeting one specific former president, fearing he might destroy evidence everyone wanted to hear.[9]
1. Pennsylvania passes its own pension law for Molly McColley.
The real woman behind the Molly Pitcher legend.
Not every law written for a particular person was intended to banish, imprison, dispossess, or execute someone.
In 1822, the Pennsylvania legislature considered a bill dedicated to an elderly Revolutionary War woman named Molly McCauley, now commonly associated with Mary Hays McCauley and the legend of "Molly Pitcher.".
The original bill described her simply as the widow of a Revolutionary War soldier. But when the bill reached the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, lawmakers made a significant change. They removed the words "soldier's widow" and replaced them with language recognizing her service during the Revolutionary War.
The final version of the law was titled "An Act to provide relief to Molly McColley for her services during the Revolutionary War." Governor Joseph Heister signed it on February 21, 1822, granting her an annual pension of $40.
What exactly McColley did during the Revolutionary War remains unclear. Later, according to a popular legend, Molly Pitcher carried water at the Battle of Monmouth and took over the cannon when her husband was no longer able to operate it. However, historians have yet to find documents confirming all aspects of this well-known story.
The documents contain a uniquely significant piece of information: the Pennsylvania legislature deliberately changed the wording to ensure that the money was paid in recognition of Mollie's services, not just her husband's.
After nine articles devoted to governments' use of individual laws to punish problematic people, it seems only fair to conclude the collection with an article written by a legislature specifically to express gratitude.[10]
More great lists
10 "groups" that are actually made up of one person.
10 Fashion Trends That Were Ruined by One Person
10 Incredible Times Laws Had Unintended Consequences.
10 People Who Seem to Defy the Laws of Physics.
10 Amazing Laws That Are Neither Scientific Nor Legal.
10 forgotten laws that are still formally in effect.
10 Cases When Real Laws Were Based on Ridiculous Hypotheses.
10 Extreme Laws That Tried to Change Society
10 Hits Written in Just a Few Minutes
Fact checked by Darci Heikkinen ShareTweetWhatsAppPinShareEmail0 reposts