Sentencing Law & Policy has an interesting post discussing a new Missouri Supreme Court ruling, which raises some interesting Tenth Amendment issues. You may read the opinion here. From the Kansas City Star:
But the state judges unanimously ruled Tuesday that sex offenders must obey a federal law that went into effect about a month after that 2006 ruling. The federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act requires all offenders, regardless of when they were convicted, to register. The federal law “imposes an independent obligation requiring respondents to register as sex offenders in Missouri,” the judges wrote.
Law enforcement authorities across the state, including Attorney General Chris Koster, applauded the ruling. Koster said the registry was designed to protect the community from offenders and the “court’s ruling supports that goal.” Former Jackson County Sheriff Tom Phillips, a defendant in a lawsuit filed by sex offenders, said the intent of the law was for all offenders to register, not just some. “I think that’s what people want,” Phillips said. “Hopefully now that will go into place. … If the laws weren’t clear as to who should and who shouldn’t register, this should clear that up.”
The court ruled Tuesday in the case of 10 convicted Jackson County sex offenders who argued that they were not required to register because of the Missouri Constitution’s protection against retrospective laws.
I was baffled by this case when it was at the intermediate appellate level and I'm even more confused now that the Missouri Supreme Court has signed off on the bizarre theory. Basically, a federal law creates federal penalties for a state law violation that can be prosecuted in state courts. That's assuming the court's statutory interpretation is correct (which I think is clearly wrong). Even accepting its interpretation, the result just seems unprecedented. I would be shocked if any other state high court follows Missouri's lead.
Recent Comments