Against Juvenile Sex Offender Registration

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 Q4 LAW
C. Carpenter
{"title":"Against Juvenile Sex Offender Registration","authors":"C. Carpenter","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2319139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Imagine if you were held accountable the rest of your life for something you did as a child? This is the Child Scarlet Letter in force: kids who commit criminal sexual acts and who pay the price with the burdens and stigma of sex offender registration. And in a game of “how low can you go?,” states have forced children as young as nine and ten years old onto sex offender registries, some with registration requirements that extend the rest of their lives. No matter the constitutionality of adult sex offender registration – and on that point, there is debate – this article argues that child sex offender registration violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Once a sex offender, always a sex offender is not an apt adage when dealing with children who commit sexual offenses. Low recidivism rates and varied reasons for their misconduct demonstrate that a child’s criminal sexual act does not necessarily portend future predatory behavior. And with a net cast so wide it ensnares equally the child who rapes and the child who engages in sex with an underage partner, juvenile sex offender registration schemes are not moored to their civil regulatory intent. Compounding the problem is mandatory lifetime registration for child offenders. This paper analogizes this practice to juvenile sentences of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, which the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional in Miller v. Alabama and Graham v. Florida. This article argues that mandatory lifetime registration applied to children in the same manner as adult offenders is cruel and unusual punishment because it violates fundamental principles that require sentencing practices to distinguish between adult and child offenders. Scrutiny of child sex offender registration laws places front and center the issue of what it means to judge our children. And on that issue, we are failing. The public’s desire to punish children appears fixed despite our understanding that child offenders pose little danger of recidivism, possess diminished culpability, and have the capacity for rehabilitation. In a debate clouded by emotion, it is increasingly clear that juvenile sex offender registration is cruel and unusual punishment.","PeriodicalId":45537,"journal":{"name":"University of Cincinnati Law Review","volume":"82 1","pages":"747"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Cincinnati Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2319139","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Imagine if you were held accountable the rest of your life for something you did as a child? This is the Child Scarlet Letter in force: kids who commit criminal sexual acts and who pay the price with the burdens and stigma of sex offender registration. And in a game of “how low can you go?,” states have forced children as young as nine and ten years old onto sex offender registries, some with registration requirements that extend the rest of their lives. No matter the constitutionality of adult sex offender registration – and on that point, there is debate – this article argues that child sex offender registration violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Once a sex offender, always a sex offender is not an apt adage when dealing with children who commit sexual offenses. Low recidivism rates and varied reasons for their misconduct demonstrate that a child’s criminal sexual act does not necessarily portend future predatory behavior. And with a net cast so wide it ensnares equally the child who rapes and the child who engages in sex with an underage partner, juvenile sex offender registration schemes are not moored to their civil regulatory intent. Compounding the problem is mandatory lifetime registration for child offenders. This paper analogizes this practice to juvenile sentences of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, which the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional in Miller v. Alabama and Graham v. Florida. This article argues that mandatory lifetime registration applied to children in the same manner as adult offenders is cruel and unusual punishment because it violates fundamental principles that require sentencing practices to distinguish between adult and child offenders. Scrutiny of child sex offender registration laws places front and center the issue of what it means to judge our children. And on that issue, we are failing. The public’s desire to punish children appears fixed despite our understanding that child offenders pose little danger of recidivism, possess diminished culpability, and have the capacity for rehabilitation. In a debate clouded by emotion, it is increasingly clear that juvenile sex offender registration is cruel and unusual punishment.
反对青少年性犯罪者登记
想象一下,如果你的余生都要为你小时候所做的事情负责?这就是生效的儿童红字:那些犯下性犯罪行为的孩子,他们付出了性犯罪者登记的负担和耻辱的代价。在“你能走多低”的游戏中?在美国,一些州强迫年仅9岁和10岁的儿童登记入性犯罪者名册,其中一些人的登记要求延长他们的余生。无论成人性犯罪者登记是否符合宪法——在这一点上,存在争议——这篇文章认为,儿童性犯罪者登记违反了第八修正案禁止残忍和不寻常惩罚的规定。“一日为性犯罪者,终生为性犯罪者”这句话在对待性犯罪儿童时并不恰当。低累犯率和其不当行为的各种原因表明,儿童的犯罪性行为不一定预示着未来的掠夺性行为。由于网撒得如此之广,无论是强奸儿童还是与未成年伴侣发生性关系的儿童,都同样会被逮捕,少年性犯罪者登记计划并不符合其民事监管意图。使问题更加复杂的是,儿童罪犯必须终身登记。本文将这种做法类比为对青少年判处无假释可能的终身监禁,最高法院在米勒诉阿拉巴马州和格雷厄姆诉佛罗里达案中宣布其违宪。本文认为,以与成年罪犯相同的方式对儿童实施强制性终身登记是残酷和不寻常的惩罚,因为它违反了要求在量刑实践中区分成人罪犯和儿童罪犯的基本原则。对儿童性犯罪者登记法的审查,将如何评判我们的孩子这一问题放在了最重要的位置。在这个问题上,我们失败了。公众惩罚儿童的愿望似乎是固定的,尽管我们知道儿童罪犯几乎没有再犯的危险,罪责减轻,而且有改过自新的能力。在一场被情绪笼罩的辩论中,越来越明显的是,青少年性犯罪者登记是一种残酷和不寻常的惩罚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The University of Cincinnati Law Review is a quarterly publication produced by second and third-year law students. The Review, along with its counterparts at all other accredited law schools, makes a significant contribution to scholarly legal literature. In addition, the Review represents the College of Law to the outside community. Each year, approximately 30 students are invited to join the Law Review as Associate Members. All Associate Members are chosen on the basis of first year grade point average combined with a writing competition score. The competition begins immediately after completion of first year studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信