
The United State Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the federal government has the right and power to keep sex offenders incarcerated, even after they've served their sentences. To keep the offender incarcerated, the government must prove that the the he or she may be "sexually dangerous" in the future.
"The federal government, as custodian of its prisoners, has the constitutional power to act in order to protect nearby (and other) communities from the danger such prisoners may pose," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in the opinion for the majority.In the case the Supreme Court ruled on, primary plantiff Graydon Comstock was certified to be dangerous six days before his prison term was set to end. Comstock had been arrested for processing child pornography and was filing suit with other inmates at the Butner Federal Correctional Complex in North Carolina.
Corrections officials determined that the men in the case remained a risk for future sexually deviant behavior if they are to be freed, while the attorneys for the inmates argued that their constitutional rights to due process was being violated by continued incarceration. They also argued that Congress was overstepping its boundaries by interfering in a matter that would normally be settled by state courts.
The 2006 Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act includes a provision allowing for indefinite confinement of sex offenders. A federal appeals court had originally argued that the lawmakers in Richmond, Va., overstepped their authority by passing the law.
"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 but who may be affected by the federal imprisonment of others," Breyer wrote.
This decision has implications in the case of Nushawn Williams, a man who has remained incarcerated past his sentence because he knowingly spread HIV to women without their knowledge. Some might argue that keeping the community safe is incredibly important and this point must be understood. We must also ensure that as we protect our children and other American citizens, we do not end up trampling all over the constitution in the process. In this case, however, it appears that some modification of the law is certainly called for.
Dr. Boyce Watkins is the founder of the Your Black World Coalition and the author of the new book, "Black American Money." To have Dr. Boyce commentary delivered to your email, please click here. 

Comments: (7)
Add a comment
By: James Gadson on 5/17/2010 3:23PM
The Government is a joke and the Supreme Court is a joke. The country is a joke and nobody is laughing! Why? Because it's not funny it's tragic.
The Supreme court has long lost it's credibility yet still sits in supreme judgment. The rich elite are running amok in this country and bringing down everything and stripping the gristle from the wealth of the country. We are like ignorant slaves waiting for our judgment day. Nobody is safe. Not even the mentally insane. Everyone wants child molesters to suffer and die, but humans should have rights and if they can do this to the molesters they can do it to you!
Don't let your prejudices cloud your judgment and make you evil. Don't let stuffy conservatives dictate your lives by destroying first those you hate.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: huge_bullbone on 5/19/2010 11:57PM
James, you make a lot of sense. However, how would you propose to protect the innocent "public-at-large" [including yourself and your loved ones] when it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt the convicted sex offender will strike again if set free. An example would be some type of restrictive setting or quarantine such as as was done for immigrants on Ellis Island and tuberculosis patients some years back.
Report This
By: James Gadson on 5/20/2010 2:25AM
To huge_bullbone: Ok if we're going to strip the constitutional rights completely away from these kind of people lets see how it looks when we start with the Catholic church!
Let them round up all the Priests and all religions who have committed these offensive crimes and treat them like lifelong parasites. Talking about born to suffer. Let's get all of the politicians too. By the time we have subjected all of the high focus people to persecution we'll see how they treat the poor and those who were falsely accused and had no decent representation in court.
Report This
By: Warren D on 5/17/2010 11:03PM
Being a father myself, I despise child predators as much as any right-minded person would.They are sewage-plain and simple.But, still, this is not good law.The precedent this would set regarding imprisonment, is chilling in that this same principle could be applied to basically anyone the government deems "dangerous".Where would it end? Who would be exempt? A person rightfully convicted of murder is the only criminal that should be locked up indefinately - Statistics prove that murderers will murder again. . and again.The term "Child Molester" has been hung on too many people undeserving of it as it is. In some states, a 19 year old male can be charged with child molestation while in a relationship with a willing 15 or 16 year old girl!! Until laws make sense, and correctly fit the crime (and perpatrator)- the brakes should be put on this proposal quick, fast, and in a hurry.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: poetrysez on 5/18/2010 1:13AM
Detaining them indefinitely is a start.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: ARNEADER on 5/18/2010 4:19AM
YAY!
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: huge_bullbone on 5/18/2010 8:33AM
This is a step in the right direction in particular when it comes to protecting the public at large from the preditory types -- especially those who prey on children or have incurable, transmittable diseases. Having said that, however, it would be cruel and unusual, thus, unconstitutional [in my opinion] to have indefinite incarcerations WITHOUT some form of MANDATED on-going efforts to address and solve that particular individual's problem(s) and the overall problem in general including timetables, goals and objectives, sanctions, and provisions for the legal protection of ALL parties involved -- including the public-at-large. That's you and me. For real.
Reply to this Comment | Report This