Sex Offense Laws, Lies, and Politics

• In Event: Fear and Loathing?: Sex Offender Registries and the War on Sex

Abstract

Widespread state and federal laws for those convicted of sex offenses emerged swiftly in the 1990s after a series of highly publicized, horrific child abductions and murders – some involving those with prior sex offense convictions. Little evidence existed then that incidents of sex offenses would decrease with public sex offender registries, but they were instituted rashly as a result of mass public anger and fear. After over 20 years of federal sex offense legislation, social science research overwhelmingly demonstrates the ineffectiveness and purely punitive nature of the laws, and legal scholars have continually challenged the constitutionality and fairness of post-conviction restrictions, though courts have upheld them. Those with prior sex offense convictions are not only publicly shamed but also face a web of barriers to societal reintegration. This paper outlines the political and panic-driven context of 1996 federal legislation leading to public sex-offender registries, presents key findings from an analysis and summary of post-1996 research about the effects of the laws, and examines why sex-offender laws continue to receive public support—despite decades of research and evidence showing they primarily function to excessively and permanently punish and publicly shame one subset of offenders. This paper highlights a few case studies that demonstrate the irrationality of these laws, as well as unintentional and devastating consequences for defendants and their families. This paper seeks to unravel how we got to a place where the criminal justice system functions as a way to banish, punish, humiliate, and ruin those labelled “sex offenders”; specifically, I examine the disconnect between conclusive, substantial research and the persistence of flawed, destructive public policies.

Author

• Emily Horowitz, St. Francis College