'Purgatory Cannot Be Worse than Hell': How the Commitment and Treatment Program Violates the Due Process Rights of Civilly Committed Sex Offenders

This chapter describes “due process,” a Constitutional restriction on governmental actions that impact individuals, in the context of public health. It outlines the doctrines of procedural and substantive due process, including the legal tests that courts apply to decide whether individuals’ due process rights have been violated. It uses examples from Supreme Court cases that have defined due process in the context of public health, including those that struggle to define the scope of reproductive rights. It also examines two cases where public health principles were raised as a justification for governmental action: one about involuntary sterilization and one about Ebola. The chapter concludes with a brief discussion of the “state action doctrine” that defines which public health actors may be challenged on due process grounds.

Download Full-text

Did a university violate grad student's due process rights?

Student Affairs Today ◽

10.1002/say.30019 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 17 (10) ◽

pp. 8-8 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Aileen Gelpi

Keyword(s):

Due Process ◽

Due Process Rights

Download Full-text

Copyright's Digital Deputies: DMCA-Plus Enforcement by Internet Intermediaries

10.31235/osf.io/grzeu ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Annemarie Bridy

Keyword(s):

Due Process ◽

Law Faculty ◽

College Of Law ◽

The Law ◽

Secondary Liability ◽

University Of Idaho ◽

Due Process Rights ◽

Voluntary Basis

In the years since passage of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), the copyright industries have demanded that online intermediaries - both those covered by the DMCA and those falling outside the statute's ambit - do more than the law requires to protect their intellectual property rights. In particular, they have sought new ways to reach and shutter "pirate sites" beyond the reach of United States law. Their demands have been answered through an expanding regime of nominally voluntary "DMCA-plus" enforcement.This chapter surveys the current landscape of DMCA-plus enforcement by dividing such enforcement into two categories: Type 1 and Type 2. Type 1 DMCA-plus enforcement is cooperation by DMCA-covered intermediaries over and above what is required for safe harbor. Type 2 DMCA-plus enforcement is cooperation by intermediaries whose activities fall outside the scope of the DMCA's safe harbors and who are not liable for their customers' copyright infringements under secondary liability rules.As the gap widens between what the law requires and what intermediaries are agreeing to do on a voluntary basis, there is reason to be concerned about the expressive and due process rights of users and website operators, who have no seat at the table when intermediaries and copyright owners negotiate "best practices" for mitigating online infringement, including which sanctions to impose, which content to remove, and which websites to block without judicial intervention.Annemarie BridyProfessor<http://www.uidaho.edu/law/faculty/annemariebridy>|University of Idaho College of Law|PO Box 83720-0051|Boise, ID 83720|Ph. 208.364.4583Affiliate Scholar<https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/about/people/annemarie-bridy>|Stanford Center for Internet and SocietyAffiliate Fellow<http://isp.yale.edu/people-directory?type=19>|Yale Information Society ProjectSSRN<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=630766>|HeinOnline<http://heinonline.org/HOL/AuthorProfile?collection=journals&search_name=Bridy,%20Annemarie&base=js>|LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/in/annemariebridy>|Twitter<https://twitter.com/AnnemarieBridy>

Download Full-text

“Mr S, you do have sexual fantasies?” The Parole Hearing and Treatment of a Sex Offender at the Turn of the 21st Century

The Canadian Journal of Sociology ◽

10.29173/cjs14844 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 38 (1) ◽

pp. 33-64 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Dany Lacombe

Keyword(s):

Sex Offenders ◽

Treatment Program ◽

Sex Offender ◽

Offender Treatment ◽

Sex Offender Treatment ◽

Sexual Fantasies ◽

Parole Board ◽

Clear Sign ◽

Prevention Plan

How does the Parole Board decide a sex offender is rehabilitated and can be released into the community? This case study of a parole hearing reveals the significance the Parole Board gives to a sex offender’s management of his arousal as a clear sign of his rehabilitation. To explain the Board’s preoccupation with a sex offender’s sexual fantasies and arousal, I draw on a prison ethnography of a sex offender treatment program. Rehabilitation as risk management relies on the development of a crime cycle and relapse prevention plan designed to grasp the connection between fantasies, arousal and offending. I argue the parole hearing and treatment program exist in a symbiotic relationship that fabricates the sex offender into a species larger than life, one at risk of offending all the time. Key words: rehabilitation, sex offenders, parole, sexual fantasies, ethnography, prison.

Download Full-text