Capstone Case:United States v. Hanousek

Edward Hanousek was employed by the Pacific & Arctic Railway and Navigation Company. As roadmaster, Hanousek was responsible under his contract "for every detail of the safe and efficient maintenance and construction of track, structures and marine facilities of the entire railroad . . . and [was to] assume similar duties with special projects." Hanousek appeals his conviction and sentence for negligently discharging a harmful quantity of oil into a navigable water of the United States, in violation of the federal Clean Water Act. Hanousek argues that part of the criminal statute violates due process if it permits a criminal conviction based on ordinary negligence.

• Do the dangers of pollution require the criminal law approach taken by Congress in this case?
• Should simple negligence be a basis for criminal liability?