Thursday, May 20, 2010

Supreme Court Fail, Again

The Supreme Court has made a few bad decisions lately (remember that doozy back in January?), but now they have essentially ruled that double jeopardy is okay for sex offenders.

From the story –
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that federal officials can indefinitely hold inmates considered "sexually dangerous" after their prison terms are complete.

By a 7-2 vote, the high court reversed a lower court decision that said Congress overstepped its authority in allowing indefinite detentions of considered "sexually dangerous."

"The statute is a 'necessary and proper' means of exercising the federal authority that permits Congress to create federal criminal laws, to punish their violation, to imprison violators, to provide appropriately for those imprisoned and to maintain the security of those who are not imprisoned by who may be affected by the federal imprisonment of others," said Justice Stephen Breyer, writing the majority opinion.
The key term here is “after their prison terms are complete.”

Now, let’s take a look at Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings of the US Constitution
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Call me crazy but it seems to me that the Supreme Court just ok’ed double jeopardy.

Now before anyone out there thinks that I am defending sex offenders, believe me I’m not. If it was up to me rapists and child molesters should be able to get the death penalty. If the concern is that these criminals shouldn’t return to society, well that is fine…just change the laws that determine the punishment for their crimes. It is entirely unacceptable for the government to be able to “indefinitely hold inmates” after they have served their time.

Steve did a post on this topic last night entitled More "Time" for Sexual Deviants.

2 comments:

Man of the West said...

Actually, Dave, I agree with you on this one. When I first read of this decision, the first thoughts through my head were, "Oh, so they can make it up as they go now?" and "Who's going to make the decisions as to what constitutes a mental condition and whether it's dangerous to the public?" You know that dissidents in the Soviet Union were often kept in asylums, right?

Blogmaster said...

Sexual deviatition once meant in popular parlance any thing that deviated from the norm. With the swing of time it may mean that again in the future. Prisons would be as common as government housing.