Reply To: NARSOL’s chairman to give testimony against civil commitment, mandatory minimums

#42589

WC_TN

I fail to see where further victim input is relevant to the legitimate determination of an offender’s continued dangerousness. The victims are brought in for the sole purpose of inflaming passion and outrage. This is going to be a kangaroo court no matter how one looks at it. One’s freedom is the most sacred of civil liberties. Surely this legitimately demands the strictest of scrutiny by the courts at every level.

https://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2017/09/legal-fight-over-minnesotas-sex-offender-program-could-have-ramifications-th

You can’t tell me that these justices weren’t “gotten to” behind the scenes. They were probably pressured by state politicians making statements like “If you overturn civil commitment in this state, it will set a precedent that will destroy the program nation-wide.” They cowered and refused to apply strict scrutiny. Had strict scrutiny been properly applied, civil commitment would now be a thing of the past.