United States Supreme Court decision holding that state civil commitment scheme did not violate Due Process, Ex Post Facto, or Double Jeopardy constitutional provisions.
Kansas v. Hendricks (1997)
Posted: September 9, 2023
U.S. v. Comstock (US 2010)
Posted: September 9, 2023
United States Supreme Court case, within the context of analysis of the Necessary and Proper clause, holding that federal statute with authorizes the civil commitment of persons convicted of sexual offenses is constitutional.
United States v. Haymond (U.S. 2019)
Posted: June 29, 2019
United States Supreme Court opinion holding unconstitutional a provision of federal law that mandated imprisonment for preponderance findings that new crimes had been committed while on supervised release.
Gundy v. United States (U.S. 2019)
Posted: June 21, 2019
United States Supreme Court opinion holding that federal SORNA does not violate principles of non-delegation with respect to its application to people who had committed their offenses prior to its enactment.
McKune v. Lile (2002)
Posted: June 11, 2019
United States Supreme Court opinion holding that consequences that stemmed from failing to comply with treatment program were not so severe as to violate the Fifth Amendment.
Connecticut Dept Public Safety v. Doe (2003)
Posted: April 28, 2019
United States Supreme Court Opinion holding that individuals required to register as sex offenders are not entitled to a hearing prior to registration to determine dangerousness, as dangerousness was not relevant to the statutory scheme.
U.S. v. Kebodeaux (US 2013)
Posted: July 26, 2017
United States Supreme Court holding that SORN's registration requirements authorized by Military Regulation Clause as well as Necessary and Proper Clause of federal Constitution.
Packingham v. North Carolina (US 2017)
Posted: July 20, 2017
US Supreme Court decision declaring unconstitutional social media ban targeting people listed on sex offense registry.
Smith v. Doe (U.S. 2003)
Posted: June 18, 2003
United States Supreme Court Opinion holding that Alaska's sex offense registry was non-punitive, and thus did not violate Ex Post Facto provisions.