Civil Committment of Sexually Dangerous Persons Upheld

As we were discussing above, the Supreme Court handed down two major decisions last Monday. This is the second, United States v. Comstock, 08-1224, in which the Court upheld the law passed by Congress ordering the civil commitment of a mentally ill federal prisoner who is a sex offender with the commitment to continue beyond the date the inmate otherwise would be released.

This reversed & remands a 4th. Circuit Court of Appeals decision from last year.

At issue here was whether Congress had the constitutional authority to enact 18 U.S.C. 4248, which authorizes court-ordered civil commitment by the federal government of (1) "sexually dangerous" persons who are already in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons, but who are coming to the end of their federal prison sentences, and (2) "sexually dangerous" persons who are in the custody of the Attorney General because they have been found mentally incompetent to stand trial.

"There are sound reasons for §4248’s enactment," the Court in its syllabus said. "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. Moreover, §4248 is 'reasonably adapted' to Congress' power to act as a responsible federal custodian. United States v. Darby, 312 U. S. 100, 121. Congress could have reasonably concluded that federal inmates who suffer from a mental illness that causes them to ‘have serious difficulty in refraining from sexually violent conduct,' §4247(a)(6), would pose an especially high danger to the public if released. And Congress could also have reasonably concluded that a reasonable number of such individuals would likely not be detained by the States if released from federal custody."

The Court in reversing & remanding, though, also said that since it had not reached or decided any claim as to whether the statute or its application denies equal protection, procedural or substantive due process, or any other constitutional rights. Respondents were free to pursue those claims on remand, and any others they have preserved.

Justice Thomas dissented, joined by Justice Scalia. Justice Kennedy concurs in the judgment only, joined by Justice Alito.


CNN and USAToday.com had more.