Indefinite Federal Detentions for citizens?

[saveliberty]

Federal Civil Commitment of Sex Offenders under Review by Supreme Court

This past January, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in US v. Comstock, a case concerning the constitutional authority of the federal government to civilly commit those found to be "sexually dangerous" for indefinite periods of time upon completion of their federal prison sentences.

Thought I heard the court upheld this 7-2.

 

[Nonelitist]

Ya, I read that Scalia and Thomas dissented.

I am conflicted on this one... have to think about it some more.

 

[hboats]

Yep, we can indefinitely hold American citizens as long as they are sexual offenders, and there is reasonable suspicion that they can not be rehabilitated.

But, we can not indefinitely hold terrorists. In fact, lets close down Guantanamo as soon as we can. Send those guy home, that won't come back to haunt us.

Rick

 

[Truthmatters]

They better be the worst repete offenders first

 

[WillowTree]

Ya, I read that Scalia and Thomas dissented.

I am conflicted on this one... have to think about it some more.

Just think.. If that were possible then Jessica Lunsford would still live.

 

[WillowTree]

Jessica Lunsford was stolen from her home, from her bed, by a repeat sex offender. He took her to his trailer, stuffed her in a closet, repeatedly raped her for a day or two, fed her pizza, the put her feet first into a black plastic bag, then he put another black plastic bag over her head. dug a hole and buried her standing up and alive, clutching her little purple animal. when they dug her up they found she had managed to poke two little fingers through hoping for some air. yep,, let's hold these perverts indefinitely untile they are as cold as their victims,, which JOhn EVANDER Couey happens to be.

 

[QUENTIN]

This is such a stupid issue.

No, you cannot Constitutionally "indefinitely detain" someone because you suspect they may commit a crime. You have to give people a fair trial, determine guilt for crimes they have already committed, and give a finite sentence for the crime. This is basic civics.

However, you can legally change federal sentencing guidelines. The recidivism rates are so incredibly high and the nature of the crime egregious enough, that I think sexual assault of a minor and aggravated rape should carry life sentences anyway. If there's popular support for keeping sexual offenders locked up, they can just be given life sentences in prison and there's no issue of Constitutionality, people have been given life for a lot less.

There's a reason the law exists and there's no reason one has to break or bend it just to afford safety to people.

 

[Nonelitist]

Ya, I read that Scalia and Thomas dissented.

I am conflicted on this one... have to think about it some more.

Just think.. If that were possible then Jessica Lunsford would still live.

Ya, I know. I only have a problem with keeping someone after their sentence is ended. I think they should instead just lock them up for life in the first place... first offense.

 

[saveliberty]

I think it is a poor decision on the part of the Supreme Court. A better answer in my opinion, is a sentence that imposes a minimum sentence of prison time with an additional sentence of clearing a three person panel for rehabilitation?