unconstitutional. do you still agree with the sentiments you expressed in your law school note? respectfully, senator, those are not the sentiments that i impressed in my law school note. my law school note was about sex offender registration laws, which at the time were relatively new. as you know from our time in law school, one of the things that law school students do, they look for new developments in the law and they try to analyze them. that s something that makes for good fodder for a law school note. my note that came out in 1996 was shortly after there were new megan s laws. the point that i was making is not that the laws were bad, that the laws were wrong, i was trying to assess something that is sort of fundamental in terms of the characterization of the
sentiments you expressed in your law school note? respectfully, senator, those are not the sentiments that i expressed in my law school note. my law school note was about sex offender registration laws, which at the time were relatively new. as you know from our time in law school, one of the things that law school students do is they look for new developments in the law and they try to analyze them. that s something that makes for good fodder for a law school note. my note, which came out in 1996, was shortly after there were new megan s laws. and the point that i was making was not that the laws were bad, that the laws were wrong. i was trying to assess something that is sort of fundamental in terms of the characterization of the laws.
unconstitutional. do you still agree with the sentiments you expressed? your law school note? those are not the sentiments that i expressed in my law school note. my law school note was about sex offender registration laws which at the time were relatively new. as you know from our time in law school, one of the things that law school students do is they look for new developments in the law and they try to analyze them. that s something that makes for good fodder for a law school note. my note, which came out in 1996, was shortly after there were new lays and the point i was making was not that the laws were bad. that the laws were wrong. i was trying to assess something that is sort of fundamental in terms of the characterization of the laws. i didn t say that they were
0 stems back decades and that is concerning. you wrote your note on the harvard law review on sex crimes. your note is your major academic work on the law review and yours is entitled prevention versus punishment: towards a principled distinction in the restraint of released sex offenders. and in it you argue, and i quote, a recent spate of legislation purports to regulate released sex offenders by requiring them to register with local law enforcement officials, notify community members of their presence, undergo dna testing and submit to civil commitment for an indefinite term. at many courts and commentators herald these laws as valid regulatory measures, others reject them as punitive enactments that violate the rights of individuals who have already been sanctioned for their crimes. under existing doctrine the constitutionality of sex offender statutes depends upon their characterization as essentially preventative rather than punitive. and what you go on to explain is if they
0 activism and advocacy as it concerns sexual predators that stems back decades and that is concerning. you wrote your note on the harvard law review on sex crimes. your note is your major academic work on the law review prevention versus punishment toward a principled distinction in the restraint in it you argue and i quote a recent spate of legislation reports to release sex offenders by requiring them to notify local law enforcement and submit to civil commitment for indefinite term. many say it violates the rights of individuals that have been sanctioned for their crimes. the contusionalty of sex offender statutes depends on their characterization as essentially preventsive rather than punitive. you explain if they re viewed an punitive, they re unconstitutional. if they re preventative, they are not. throughout the course of your note, you argue they should be viewed as punitive and therefore unconstitutional. indeed in the second to last page you go through each of those for ca