Sexual Offender Registration Acts: Supreme Court Review of the Connecticut and Alaska Statutes in Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety v. Doe and Smith v. Doe (CRS Report for Congress)
| Release Date |
March 24, 2003 |
| Report Number |
RS21334 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Charles Doyle, American Law Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
Summary:
The United States Supreme Court has rejected constitutional challenges to two state sex offender
registration and notification statutes (SORA), Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety v. Doe ,
123 S.Ct.
1140 (2003); Smith v. Doe , 123 S.Ct. 1160 (2002). In one, it concluded that as a matter
of due
process registrants under the Connecticut statute need not be afforded the opportunity of a hearing
to establish that they should be released from the burdens of the statute because they are not currently
dangerous. In the other, it held that the ex post facto clause does not ban application of the Alaska
statute to convictions for misconduct occurring prior to enactment of the statute. The Justices left
open the possibility that such statutes might be subject to constitutional attack on substantive due
process grounds and possibly on equal protection grounds.
