This isn’t the typical case for an ex post facto law, though. The PROTECT Act didn’t criminalize any conduct that was previously legal. It simply changed the statute of limitations for conducts thatbwere already criminal. Since the basis for rejecting convictions based on ex post facto laws is the fact that nobody can be expected to act according to laws that didn’t exist at the time of their actions and posession of child pornography was very much a crime when R. Kelly posessed child porn, and since the expectation that the courts will fail to do their job on time does not enjoy any legal protection, there is nothing inherently wrong with applying the PROTECT Act to R. Kelly’s case.

This is my opinion as a lawyer, however I am not licensed to practice law in the USA specifically, so I may be 100% wrong.

If they actually did that they’d go out of business really fast. They have to fight against your right to block ads instead.

I was under the imoression that Telegram was a better alternative to WhatsApp but even WhatsApp doesn’t have ads. What should I be using, then?