Read and Comment: 25 Years After Court Ruling, Released Sex Offenders Endure ‘Shadow Prisons’
On June 23 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Kansas v. Hendricks, upheld the practice of detaining people convicted of sexual offenses beyond prison sentences under the guise of treatment.
The landmark 5-4 ruling also concluded that the Kansas law governing the practice did not constitute double jeopardy since it merely authorized “civil” rather than “criminal” commitments.
Taken together with Kansas v. Crane, a 7-2 ruling announced in 2002 that denied requiring a set legal standard for determining “behavioral abnormality” in civil commitment proceedings, the High Court in effect created a purgatory for persons who have served their sentences but are subject to indefinite detention based on fears that they are a danger to the public.
At least 20 states have involuntary sex offense civil commitment programs. So does the federal system.
A headline in Reason Magazine over a story by Jacob Sullum effectively summed up what such programs amount to: “Civil Commitment of Sex Offenders Pretends Prisoners Are Patients.”
There’s a good reason why critics refer to these programs as “shadow prisons”: They resemble prison in all but name.
if someone is detained/jailed after serving his or her sentence i don’t see how the supreme court does not see that as punitive.
Maybe its because i am a sex offender or maybe not but before my charge i was always if you paid your debt to society your free to be a part of society again unless you mess up.
@no hope. You are not a sex offender. If you have corrected whatever the behavior was, you are not a sex offender.
Sarcasm below, in case it isn’t crystal clear.
When discussing Friday’s anti-abortion ruling by our well-educated and well-informed US Supreme Court (they realize how dangerously high sex offense recidivism is), our country’s vice president said – “This is the first time in the history of our nation that a constitutional right has been taken from the people of America.” She sounds just as informed as the Supreme Court.
Rayo
She is correct in a way, “taken from the people”. Remember, we are not people but horrible animals. At least that is what they want the public to think.
We are they thing that must not be spoken.
Yesterday was the 25th anniversary of Kansas v Hendricks but something came up so I didn’t get to share this until now. But my personal stalker who is connected to the Book Crime Family is on there.
At the risk of inviting further harassment, may I ask who are/is Val Parkworst, Trevor Silas, and AriSorkinStash? I mean who is the person hiding behind these pseudonyms?
That is basically how they are getting away with us being on lifetime registry, stating it is only civil. Russia, China, The United states (Sorry we are NOT united) and several other countries treat their citizens in a NON civil manner. Humanity has somehow escaped us, and to think, we point at the horrors other countries impose on their citizens.
We are no better than them for locking people up well past and beyond their sentences. All under the guise of “Oh it is civil”. Look the word Civil up. It has many meanings but none of them comes close to being comparable to Non punitive. What is happening to so many of us is anything but civil.
I invite every one of the justices to come walk a month in our shoes. To see, feel and experience what our families go through on a daily basis. All because of forced compliance of retro active punishments and restrictions placed on us for life in many cases such as Florida.
I guess judges don’t know what a dictionary is, as civil laws can and do have punitive damages (fancy word for punishment), and the actual meaning of punishment!
Punishment, commonly, is the imposition of an undesirable or unpleasant outcome upon a group or individual, meted out by an authority[1][2][3][4]—in contexts ranging from child discipline to criminal law—as a response and deterrent to a particular action or behavior that is deemed undesirable or unacceptable.[5] It is, however, possible to distinguish between various different understandings of what punishment is.[6]
The old village stocks in Chapeltown, Lancashire, England
The reasoning for punishment may be to condition a child to avoid self-endangerment, to impose social conformity (in particular, in the contexts of compulsory education or military discipline[7]), to defend norms, to protect against future harms (in particular, those from violent crime), and to maintain the law—and respect for rule of law—under which the social group is governed.
Seems pretty obvious that these laws are in deed, punishment!
I don’t care how bad of a crime a person committed; once he’s completed his sentence, he’s entitled to his freedom. PERIOD.
I don’t care if States want to call civil commitment “civil”. Its Punitive, because it violates a man’s right to due process of law. If people are so afraid that someone “might” commit another crime once released from prison, maybe they should petition their legislature to change sentencing guidelines.
Its discriminatory to punish only one group of people. Why don’t we civilly commit someone who has just finished his sentence for murder? After all, he “might” commit another crime. What about drug dealers? When I was in prison, I directly observed a few people who were in for selling drugs get a parole, and within 2 or 3 months they were back with a new drug charge. One guy in particular I saw leave and come back 4 times for a new drug charge!!! Never once did I ever see someone convicted of a sex crime return on a new charge. Our government’s reach has gotten too long.
Excuse me now while I go watch the movie Minority Report again.
Is there legislative oversight in Florida with the SOR? If not, why?