Bradley on "Retribution and Overcriminalization"

My friend and colleague, Gerry Bradley, has a new paper up, called "Retribution and Overcriminalization," at the Heritage Foundation's site.  Here is the abstract:

From the ever-expanding number of federal criminal laws to prison sentences that are too numerous or too long, there are many promising bases for criticizing overcriminalization. One such basis, however, has yet to be fully considered: the fact that too many criminal offenses today are malum prohibitumoffenses—that is, they criminalize conduct that is morally innocuous—and do not contain an adequate mens rea (criminal-intent) element. In order to limit the growth of laws criminalizing morally innocuous conduct—a development that, in turn, would curb overcriminalization—the U.S. legal community would be well-served to explore the concept of retribution and the manner in which it provides an account of how punishing those convicted of criminal offenses is morally justified. Punishment without a firm basis in retribution is unjust and therefore should be avoided.

Bradley makes points, I think, that are particularly important for Catholics to engage.  Too often, "retribution" is rejected, or pushed to the side, by Catholics in discussions of criminal justice, perhaps because it seems -- if not correctly understood -- mean, harsh, unforgiving, etc., etc.  In fact, though, retribution is central to a Christian understanding of the nature of, justifications for, and limits to punishment.