re: #48 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Agreed. Either sentence them more severely (which I am in favor of) or let them go.

Hi Kragar! I’m with you on that. If the sentences currently in place are insufficient to meet the need to protect, then change them. But to simply decide that it’s okay to detain someone after a sentence has been served - is not a road I’m happy about taking.

It is also interesting that the article indicates that:

A majority of Supreme Court justices seemed inclined Tuesday to accept that the federal government has the power to indefinitely hold prisoners who are deemed sexually dangerous, even if they have completed their sentences.

But only mentions three justices specifically: Ginzburg, Breyer, and Stevens - all of whom are part of the more liberal side of the bench. I wonder who else (would need to be two) tends to think this way. It’s clear Scalia does not, which would lead me to think that Roberts, Thomas, and Alioto probably don’t either.

(The only mention of Chief Justice Roberts is in his agreement with the administration that the release of such prisoners should not happen until the SC case has been decided.)

So, I’d guess that Kennedy and Sotomeyer are the other two justices making up the “majority” cited in the article.

I find it odd that the more liberal justices would be inclined to support the idea of throwing out one of the fundamentals of our criminal justice system - paying your debt to society based on the laws in place, then being set free.