Supreme Court decisions have been heavily relied upon by legislators, and other courts in their own constitutional decision, mainly upholding the registration and notification laws. Lile , U. Doe , U. Now Justice Kennedy relied on this earlier language of McKune v. The risk of recidivism posed by sex offenders is "frightening and high.
The study found that in McKune v. The study found the Practitioners Guide itself cites only one source which originates from "a mass market magazine aimed at a lay audience", and was bare assertion with no supporting citations by a treatment program counselor, who is not a scholar and has no expertise in sex offender recidivism.
Furthermore, the article was about counseling program the counselor run in Oregon prison, not about sex crime recidivism. The study concludes that the claim of high re-offense rates among all sex offenders, and the effectiveness of counseling programs in reducing it, was merely "unsupported assertion of someone without research expertise who made his living selling such counseling programs to prisons", and that use of the unsourced statistics in McKune v.
Supreme Court rulings[ edit ] In two cases docketed for argument on 13 November , the sex offender registries of two states, Alaska and Connecticut, would face legal challenge. This was the first instance that the Supreme Court had to examine the implementation of sex offender registries in throughout the U. The ruling would let the states know how far they could go in informing citizens of perpetrators of sex crimes. Doe the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed public disclosure of sex offender information.
Reasoning that sex offender registration deals with civil laws , not punishment, the Court ruled 6—3 that it is not an unconstitutional ex post facto law.
The court found that in San Diego County, the 2,feet rule meant that less than 3 percent of multi-unit housing was available to offenders. Additionally, federal law banned anyone in a state database of sex offenders from receiving federal housing subsidies after June Florida[ edit ] Florida passed a "Red Sign Law" that allows any law enforcement agency to place large red signs in sex offenders yards stating the name of the person and that they live at that address.
Florida is one of the most restrictive states in the US when it comes to sex offender laws. The Court reasoned that the sex offender law authorized "public notification of the potential registrant's status as a convicted sex offender without notice, an opportunity to be heard, or any preliminary determination of whether and to what extent he actually represents a danger to society".
A ruling stated the "geographic exclusion zones" in the Sex Offender Registry Act, such as student safety areas that stretch for 1, feet around schools, are unconstitutional.
Judge Cleland also stated law enforcement does not have strong enough guidelines to know how to measure the 1,foot exclusion zone around schools. Neither sex offenders or law enforcement have the tools or data to determine the zones. In response to these rulings, in , several Missouri state Senators proposed an amendment to the Missouri Constitution that would exempt sex offender registration laws from the ban on retrospective civil laws. Phillips now styled Doe v. Keathley on 16 June The Court held that the Missouri Constitution's provision prohibiting laws retrospective in operation no longer exempts individuals from registration if they are subject to the independent Federal obligation created under the Sexual Offenders Registration and Notification Act SORNA , 42 U.
Phillips were once again required to register. On 12 January , Cole County Circuit Judge Richard Callahan ruled that individuals who plead guilty to a sex offense are not required to register under Federal Law and thus are not required to register in Missouri if the date of their plea was prior to the passage of the Missouri registration law.
Under New York law, only level 3 offenders and those on probation or parole are prohibited from being within 1, feet of school grounds or a day care center. On August 20, the North Carolina Court of Appeals struck down the law, saying it is too vague, and violates free speech. That stay was granted but no other outcome from that stay has moved forward. Ohio[ edit ] In , The Supreme Court of Ohio found automatic lifetime registration for juveniles to be unconstitutional.
This decision barred retroactive application of Ohio's Adam Walsh Act to those whose crimes predated the law's enactment. In a decision, the court concluded that the state, by making an "irrefutable presumption" about adults' behavior based on crimes they committed as teens, violated their constitutional right to due process.
D Candidate, write in their article, published in Hastings Law Journal , " The Evolution of Unconstitutionality in Sex Offender Registration Laws ", that sex offender registration laws were initially anchored by rational basis but have since spiraled into what they characterize as "super-registration schemes".
They argue that even if initial registration schemes were constitutional, the series of amendments piling up more penalties has turned the registration schemes unconstitutionally punitive. The article posits that the decisions in Smith v. Doe and Connecticut Dept.
Doe upholding the registration schemes as civil regulations, leaving them immune to substantive due process and procedural due process requirements normally associated with criminal laws, combined with legislators who are eager "to draft increasingly harsh registration and notification schemes to please an electorate that subsists on a steady diet of fear", has led to runaway legislation that has become "unmoored from its initial constitutional grounding".
Springer Publishing Co Inc.