When Animus Matters and Sex Offense Underreporting Does Not: The Sex Offender Registry Regime

38 Pages Posted: 1 Apr 2021 Last revised: 3 Apr 2021

See all articles by Ira Mark Ellman

Ira Mark Ellman

Center for the Study of Law and Society, Berkeley Law, University of California, Berkeley; Arizona State University College of Law; Arizona State University (ASU) - Department of Psychology

Date Written: March 30, 2021

Abstract

In Romer v. Evans the Court drew a constitutional distinction between civil laws enacted for a broad public purpose that justifies "the incidental disadvantages they impose on certain persons," and laws that have "the peculiar property of imposing a broad and undifferentiated disability on a single named group". Laws of the second kind "raise the inevitable inference that the disadvantage imposed is born of animosity toward the class of persons affected." The difficulty lies in deciding when the inference properly becomes a conclusion that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause. The more sweeping and unusual the burdens imposed on the targeted group, the more difficult it may be to discern a common policy explaining them other than the forbidden purpose of harming their targets. At some point the animus inference may be strong enough to require scrutiny of the laws' purported rationale, including whether it has any actual basis in fact.

An astonishingly broad array of burdens are imposed today on anyone ever convicted of almost any sexual offense of any kind or seriousness, including but extending far beyond their simple inclusion in publicized websites listing "sex offenders." No similar regime has ever been imposed on any other group of law-abiding former felons who have fully served the sentence for the crime they committed years earlier. This "registry regime" raises as strong an inference of animus as there was in any of the four cases in which the Court sustained such claims, and the claim that it is justified by the clearly valid purpose of reducing the incidence of sexual offending does not survive the scrutiny of scientific studies which find the registry ineffective and often counterproductive. Nor does the fact that many sexual offenses are never reported to law enforcement authorities cast any doubt on the validity of those studies or on the legal or policy analyses relying on them. Much of the registry regime must therefore fall under an Anti-Animus principle.

Keywords: sex offenders, sex offenses, collateral consequences, animus

Suggested Citation

Ellman, Ira Mark, When Animus Matters and Sex Offense Underreporting Does Not: The Sex Offender Registry Regime (March 30, 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3817201 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3817201

Ira Mark Ellman (Contact Author)

Center for the Study of Law and Society, Berkeley Law, University of California, Berkeley ( email )

Berkeley, CA 94720-2150
United States

HOME PAGE: http://csls.berkeley.edu/people/csls-affiliates

Arizona State University College of Law ( email )

Box 877906
Phoenix, AZ
United States

Arizona State University (ASU) - Department of Psychology ( email )

950 S. McAllister Ave
P. O. Box 871104
Tempe, AZ 85287-1104
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
67
Abstract Views
183
rank
414,390
PlumX Metrics