Supreme Court of the United States Rules Prisoners Deemed Sexually Dangerous May Be Detained Beyond Sentence

The Supreme Court of the United States recently decided the case of U.S. v. Comstock, involving four men who were convicted on child pornography and/or sexual abuse of a minor charge(s). The men were convicted under the “Adam Walsh Act”, signed into Federal law in 2006. The Act allows for the civil detainment of sexually dangerous federal inmates, beyond the sentences imposed upon them by the Courts. The Act was challenged by the inmates on Constitutional grounds, the inmates arguing that Congress overstepped its authority by instituting such a law. The Federal District Court agreed with the inmates, and a subsequent appeal to the Circuit Court resulted in a similar holding. The United States then appealed to the Supreme Court who elected to hear the case. The Court also elected to grant an injunction last year, on the release of sexually dangerous prisoners, pending the Courts decision in Comstock.

The Court examined the portion of the Act in question under a Constitutional analysis. It is important to note that the only part of the Act challenged by the inmates was the section regarding civil detainment; the Act also provides for a national registry of sex offenders and other societal protections, not challenged by the inmates nor considered by the Court.

The Court overturned the lower court decisions, holding Congress was well within their Constitutional rights to create such legislation. The Court considered the detainment clause under five separate analyses. First, the Court found that although the Constitution does not expressly give Congress the power to imprison violators of federal crimes and maintain the security of those not imprisoned but who may be affected, there is a broad authority to do both of those things under the necessary and proper clause of the Constitution. In other words, Congress may create legislation which is necessary and proper to protect those members of society who would be put in danger by the release of sexually dangerous prisoners.

Second, legislation is in place which allows for the detainment of mentally ill prisoners who are deemed too dangerous for release. The Court analyzed the established statute and compared it to the Adam Walsh Act, finding similarity between the two. The Court reasoned that since sexually dangerous prisoners can be deemed to have a mental illness, the previously established statute was precedent for the detainment of those deemed sexually dangerous.

Third, the Court found that Congress has the responsibility to protect the safety and welfare of society. Fourth, the Court held that the Adam Walsh Act does not violate the Tenth Amendment as an impingement on States’ powers.

Finally, the Court rationed that the Act is narrowly tailored and does not provide for general police powers. The Act applies solely to those prisoners deemed sexually dangerous and who would pose a risk to society if released. The Act is a narrowly tailored means of accomplishing the goal of protecting society, and only applies to a small percentage of people, already imprisoned by the Federal Government.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court has held that federal inmates may be detained beyond their sentences if deemed sexually dangerous and a threat to society. The Adam Walsh Act has been deemed Constitutional by the Supreme Court and as such, applies to federal inmates convicted of sexual offenses.

Those convicted of crimes and/or imprisoned are still subject to the protections of the Constitution of the United States. An experienced criminal defense attorney not only ensures a defendant’s rights are protected during legal proceedings, but also while imprisoned and beyond. If you have been charged with, or convicted of a sexual offense, you still have constitutional rights which the Law Offices of Marc Neff will protect. For a confidential consultation, please contact our office at 215-563-9800 or via email at marc@nefflawoffices.com.