[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash

New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms

Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania

Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally

"It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala

Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump

Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive'

(Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.

Tenn. AG reveals ICE released thousands of ‘murderers and rapists’ from detention centers into US streets

Kamala Harris Touts Mass Amnesty Offering Fast-Tracked Citizenship to Nearly Every Illegal Alien in U.S.

Migration Crisis Fueled Rise in Tuberculosis Cases Study Finds

"They’re Going to Try to Kill Trump Again"

"Dems' Attempts at Power Grab Losing Their Grip"

"Restoring a ‘Great Moderation’ in Fiscal Policy"

"As attacks intensify, Trump becomes more popular"

Posting Articles Now Working Here

Another Test

Testing

Kamala Harris, reparations, and guaranteed income

Did Mudboy Slim finally kill this place?

"Why Young Americans Are Not Taught about Evil"

"New Rules For Radicals — How To Reinvent Kamala Harris"

"Harris’ problem: She’s a complete phony"

Hurricane Beryl strikes Bay City (TX)

Who Is ‘Destroying Democracy In Darkness?’

‘Kamalanomics’ is just ‘Bidenomics’ but dumber

Even The Washington Post Says Kamala's 'Price Control' Plan is 'Communist'


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

U.S. Constitution
See other U.S. Constitution Articles

Title: Are sex offender registries unconstitutional?
Source: HotAir
URL Source: https://hotair.com/archives/2017/09 ... r-registries-unconstitutional/
Published: Sep 2, 2017
Author: Jazz Shaw
Post Date: 2017-09-02 18:42:21 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 1310
Comments: 5

A ruling coming out of a federal court in Denver this week could lead to a significant change in how the country deals with convicted sex offenders. Judge Richard Matsch heard a case involving three convicted sex offenders who were protesting having all of their personal information published on a public sex offender registry. Rather than ruling on whether or not the three could have their details removed (which was all that was requested), Matsch ruled that the entire registry was unconstitutional. This one is going to be appealed and if it makes it to the Supreme Court it could impact the laws in pretty much every state in the union. (CBS Denver)
A federal court judge in Denver has called the public sex offender registry in Colorado “cruel and unusual punishment.”

The Colorado Bureau of Investigation posts a list of registered sex offenders required under the law. It contains names, pictures, addresses, descriptions and more and readily available to anyone on the internet.

But now, Federal Judge Richard Matsch has found that to be a violation of the U.S. Constitution. He wrote that the public has been given the “power to inflict punishments beyond those imposed through the court.”

Alison Ruttenberg, the attorney for the sex offenders, told CBS4’s Rick Sallinger they were often scarred for life because of all the public information available on the convicted criminals.

In some ways this judge could be seen as swimming against the current. The Supreme Court has already heard challenges to the constitutionality of sex registries on a couple of occasions and has allowed them to stand. The most frequently cited case seems to be Smith v. Doe, a 2003 case out of Alaska. In it, Anthony Kennedy described how the court had to determine if lifetime registration on these publicly available lists constituted ex post facto retroactive punishment. His decision cited the “frightening and high risk of recidivism” among sex offenders as sufficient justification for the extra burden placed on them by the registry after completing the rest of the sentence.

That decision has been under criticism lately because the statistics on recidivism which were cited turned out to be completely flawed. (That’s not to say that the recidivism rate might not be very high, but the study they used is now largely discounted.) With that in mind, and this ruling as an initial step, I wonder if this somewhat restaffed court will see the question differently. It was only a 5-4 decision last time.

I’ve personally never been comfortable with the idea of lifetime registries. It’s a case which causes a lot of internal conflict because I personally find sex offenders to be among the worst, most monstrous class of criminals, and even more so when the victims include children. (Yes, we’re talking to you, Roman Polanski.) Even absent an actual murder, some of the worst are, in my opinion, suitable candidates for the death penalty. But when we convict someone of a crime and sentence them to some term in jail, perhaps with additional probation, it just seems as though that’s supposed to be the end of it. A lifetime on such a registry absolutely seems like a life sentence in some ways even though that’s not what the criminal was sentenced to.

There are no easy answers here as far as I’m concerned. But given how many people it would affect across the entire country, this one will be worth keeping an eye on.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Tooconservative (#0)

Keep the registry, but limit the access to those who may be impacted. Require them to go to the police station and fill out a request form which includes a confidentiality clause.

Or do away with the registry if people abuse the information.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   18:57:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: misterwhite (#1)

I thought it interesting that the registries have survived so long without any serious challenges.

Apparently, this judge just up and ruled them unconstitutional, kind of out of the blue.

We'll see what the Supremes think, perhaps.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-09-02   20:35:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Tooconservative (#2)

I thought it interesting that the registries have survived so long without any serious challenges.

Yeah. Cruel and unusual punishment. Violation of due process (registry for some felons, not others). Fourth amendment right to privacy.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-03   10:51:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Tooconservative (#0)

It was just a way for liberals to feel like they care and support "law and order" at the same time. Many, maybe even most sex offenders should have been put out of societies misery instead of housed. We are commanded by God(IMO)to put these people to death that they do not become rampant within society. Frankly it is our faults that sexual perversion, murder and drug addictions are so common. We accept it as part of the price of freedom. Drug addicts should be locked up in insane asylums until they are no longer mentally ill. Drug pushers, including those within government pushing or looking the other way, while quantities are shipped into the country, should be put to death promptly.

Exercising rights is only radical to two people, Tyrants and Slaves. Which are YOU? Our ignorance has driven us into slavery and we do not recognize it.

jeremiad  posted on  2017-09-03   17:45:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: jeremiad (#4)

The Supremes have previously upheld these registries when they were challenged. However, the primary study upon which the courts have relied for years on recidivism by offenders has been revealed under review to have severe flaws and to overstate the danger of recidivism, the primary justification for allowing registries to begin with. So what's at stake here is whether the Supremes are willing to follow through on that new information about the key study they've based their past decisions on.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-09-03   19:23:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com