Supreme Court roundup


  • The civil/criminal distinction, if it is to be retained for ex post facto law purposes has to have some reality—we have a constitutional panoply of rights, one of which is NOT to have to tell the government where we are, where we can live etc. When these are taken away, the punishment IS criminal, and should have to be embodied in the criminal judgment at the time it is entered.

    • what about communities that ban convicted sex offenders from moving there if they were not already “citizens of that community”? I understand that for some classes of those crimes, the recitivism rate is supposedly high, but, this is the U.S. and anything not specifically taken in the constitution is held by the people or the state. On the other hand, how do general policies or laws (not sure which they are), like parole and such are actually presented at time of sentencing? I haven’t actually formed an informed opinion on this, only the kneejerk reaction of adding stuff after the fact is bad.