Steve Cohen, TN's Lone Democrat, Announces He's Not Seeking Re-Election
Dexter Taylor Shows Why New York's Anti-Gunners Can't Be Taken Seriously
Trump Just Clowned 'Vegan' James Talarico Into Oblivion With These Remarks
Gavin Newsom’s Former Chief of Staff Cops to Massive Fraud, Tax Scam, and...
Tim Walz Called Steve Scalise a 'Bootlicker' and Scalise's Response Was Perfect
The Justice Department Found Yale Discriminated Against White, Asian Med School Applicants
The Massachusetts Judge Who Gave Cambridge Gunman a Light Sentence Knew He Was...
As Gavin Newsom Touts CA's Education Spending, Spot What He Doesn't Brag About
If Democrats Care About 'Black Representation,' Why Are They Silent About Frederica Wilson...
Why It’s Time to Disown Tucker and Megyn
Judge Sues Illinois Supreme Court for Unconstitutional Dismissal, Violation of Free Speech...
The CIA Lands in Havana: Trump Sends a Direct Message to the Cuban...
Greg Gutfeld Mocks Whoopi Goldberg After She Accuses Trump of Castrating the United...
Here's How Seriously the US Took Digital Security on President Trump's Trip to...
Nithya Raman Wants to Ban What? See Her Latest Proposed Fire Prevention Policy
OPINION

Indefinite Detention of Sex Offenders Flouts the Rule of Law

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Indefinite Detention of Sex Offenders Flouts the Rule of Law

Although Macon Baker completed his prison sentence in 2006, the state of Missouri kept him behind bars, repeatedly trying to commit him as a "sexually violent predator." After three juries deadlocked on the question of whether Baker suffers from a "mental abnormality" that makes him "more likely than not" to commit new sex crimes after he is released, a fourth jury on Friday unanimously agreed he does not. In effect, the state retroactively extended Baker's sentence from 10 years to 17.

Advertisement

The military prison at Guantanamo Bay is notorious as a place where people can be held indefinitely without charge because the usual rules of criminal justice do not apply. Twenty states have their own versions of Guantanamo Bay for sex offenders, a fact that attracts little attention and generates little outrage because the detainees are even less sympathetic than suspected terrorists.

At the age of 18, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports, Baker "got caught sticking his hand in the pants of a 5-year-old girl playing in a yard." He pleaded guilty to sexual abuse, got probation and underwent treatment. Fourteen years later, after he was arrested for molesting the 7-year-old daughter of close friends, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

You may well think a 10-year sentence is too short for a child molester. The prosecution thought 25 years would have been appropriate. But that is not the sentence Baker got, and lengthening a prison term after it has been completed is a practice usually associated with arbitrary dictatorships, not liberal democracies that supposedly respect the rule of law.

When it upheld a law similar to Missouri's in the 1997 case Kansas v. Hendricks, the Supreme Court said preventive detention of sex offenders is constitutional as long as the aim is not "punitive" and the procedures for committing people meet the requirements of due process. In a concurring opinion, however, Justice Anthony Kennedy warned that if the official rationale for commitment is treatment, "but the treatment provisions were adopted as a sham or mere pretext," that fact would indicate "the forbidden purpose to punish."

Advertisement

Related:

RULE OF LAW

Missouri's Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services (SORTS), the target of a federal lawsuit that argues it locks people in a prison disguised as a hospital, seems to illustrate Kennedy's point. "Since the program started in 1999," the Post-Dispatch reports, "nobody has completed treatment." In a 2009 memo, the director of Missouri's Department of Mental Health worried that such a record would prove SORTS is nothing but a "sham."

Minnesota, with more civilly committed sex offenders per capita than any other state, has a similarly dismal record, even though it spends $120,000 a year to detain each of those "patients," three times the cost of keeping someone in prison. Last week, in a ruling that allowed a lawsuit challenging the Minnesota Sex Offender Program (MSOP) to proceed, U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank noted that "no civilly committed sex offender has ever been discharged." Assuming the facts alleged by the plaintiffs are true, he said, "it appears that MSOP may very well be serving the constitutionally impermissible purposes of retribution and deterrence."

Some states have better records. But overall, as you might expect given the incentives involved, civilly committed sex offenders are almost never deemed to be "cured," and so they are almost never released.

In Kansas v. Hendricks, the Supreme Court emphasized that a sex offender could be committed only if he suffered from a "mental abnormality" or "personality disorder" that undermined self-control, justifying "a prediction of future dangerousness." But according to Justice Department data, most prisoners have "mental health problems," and many of them surely have behaved in ways that would make a "prediction of future dangerousness" plausible.

Advertisement

Is that all it takes to lose your freedom forever? If so, the idea that people should be imprisoned only for crimes they have committed, as opposed to crimes they might commit in the future, may one day seem positively quaint.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement