Megan's Laws & Establishment Clause Outline of Handouts --Topic 1 Megan'

Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety, et al. Petitioners, v.

John Does on Writ of Certiorari to 2d Cir. Court of Appeals, July 19, 2002. Summary of Briefs:

Issues. Respondent, who was convicted of a violent sex offense before Connecticut's SORL went into effect challenged the law's constitutionality on the grounds that it was an Art. I, sec. 10 ex post facto law and that his rights to procedural due process were violated because the law caused him to be stigmatized and defamed as a dangerous sex offender without his having been afforded an opportunity to show that he was not dangerous. The District Court and Court of Appeals agreed with his procedural due process claim. They held that the central flaw in the law is that the registration requirement and SO registry did not differentiate between dangerous and non-dangerous SO's. The Court

. . .
ies Union called that "classic retroactive punishment" (p. 2). John Roberts of the State of Alaska argued that the law was not punitive because its purpose was to protect the public, and minors in particular and therefore, has a regulatory purpose. Totenberg asked whether it is fair to so stigmatize a SO without giving him "some right to refute his listing as a sex offender beforehand?" (p. 3). In California, minor SOs have to register, but public disclosure of what they submit is limited. In Connecticut some minor SO's have a right to a hearing on their degree of dangerousness. Thompson said "the trouble with Alaska's law . . . is that there are no individualized determinations as to that person's risk of re-offending" (p. 3). Denise M. Bonilla and Joy L. Woodson, "ON THE LAW: Continuing Debate Over Megan's Law: Some question whether sex offender list curbs crime." Los Angeles Times, February 14, 2003. This article raises most of the key public policy issues associated with Megan's Laws. First, the authors note that the laws' enactment was motivated in large part by powerful public emotional reactions to heinous sex crimes. They question whether emotion provides a proper basis for the enactment of such laws. Workability.
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Establishment Clause, Justice Stevens, Facto Law, District Court, Court Appeals, Paul Davis, Supreme Court, Judge Goodwin, Megan's Law, SOs Kennedy, establishment clause, supreme court, sex offender, 'under god', due process, public safety, court appeals, justice stevens, dissenting opinion, doe supreme court, convicted sex, violated establishment clause, procedural due process, ex post facto, circuit court appeals,
Approximate Word count = 4457
Approximate Pages = 18 (250 words per page)