High Court Mulls Indefinite Jail for Sex Offenders

Wednesday, 13 Jan 2010 08:19 AM

 

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
|  A   A  
  Copy Shortlink
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday appeared divided on the constitutionality of a 2006 law allowing the federal government to detain some sex offenders after they have served out their prison sentences.

The law is being challenged by four men convicted of various sex crimes who were ordered held after they completed prison terms, and a fifth man who was held after being judged mentally incompetent to stand trial for a sex offense.

The US Constitution grants American states the right to use police power to hold citizens indefinitely if their release would pose a significant threat to the rest of the population, though not all states use that power.

But in 2006, Congress passed legislation giving the federal government a similar power in the case of individuals deemed "sexually dangerous."

Critics of the legislation, which was signed by former president George W. Bush, said it gave the federal government unconstitutional power.

During an hour of oral argument Tuesday, US government lawyers said the legislation was only intended to be used in cases where states did not assume responsibility for "civil commitment" of convicts deemed likely to reoffend.

"This is not unusual, that the state takes custody," said Solicitor General Elena Kagan.

"If the state does not, the federal government would ensure that the person will stay in federal custody," she added.

But the court's nine justices appeared sharply divided on the question and cognizant of the implications of sanctioning indefinite detention on the basis of potential criminal acts.

Justice Antonin Scalia questioned the government's premise in arguing for the detention power, saying they had suggested: "It's constitutional because it's necessary."

"But I'm not sure it's even necessary," the conservative justice added.

But attorney G. Alan Dubois, arguing for the five men, said the constitution only allowed the use of detention as "a punishment for a crime."

So far, lower courts have agreed, ruling that the legislation is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court will rule on the case this spring.

© AFP 2014

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Email:
Country
Zip Code:
Privacy: We never share your email.
 
Hot Topics
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
Top Stories
You May Also Like

Ben Carson Tries to Clarify Stance on Second Amendment Rights

Thursday, 20 Nov 2014 15:42 PM

Potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson used a conference call with supporters Wednesday to tack . . .

'I Killed JFK' Producer: We Have Confession of Alleged JFK Killer

Thursday, 20 Nov 2014 14:49 PM

As the 51st anniversary of the assassination of former President John F. Kennedy is approaching, the producer of a new d . . .

Gallup Poll: Majority Say Healthcare Isn't Government's Duty

Thursday, 20 Nov 2014 14:49 PM

For the third consecutive year, a majority of Americans said it is not the role of the federal government to ensure all  . . .

Most Commented

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

 
NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved