Sex-offender law rejected by U.S. court

-- A federal appeals court yesterday held that the federal civil commitment law for sex offenders was unconstitutional and that alleged victims of abuse at the hands of a former Somali official may sue him.

In a North Carolina case, a three-judge panel of the Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling by a federal judge in Raleigh that a provision of a 2006 federal law on civil commitment intruded on powers the Constitution reserves for states.

The federal law, like those in Virginia and many other states, permits sex offenders still believed to be dangerous to be civilly committed and held for treatment after their prison terms are over.

"The Constitution does not empower the federal government to confine a person solely because of asserted 'sexual dangerousness' when the Government need not allege (let alone prove) that this 'dangerousness' violates any federal law," ruled the court.

Carl Tobias, a University of Richmond analyst, said he does not believe the decision has any effect on Virginia's or any other state civil commitment law. It is believed to be the first time a federal appeals court has taken up the matter.

In the Somali case, another three-judge panel overruled U.S. District judge Leonie M. Brinkema, who ruled that Mohamed Ali Samantar, Somali's minister of defense from January 1980 to December, 1986, could not be sued because of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

The plaintiffs include three who allege they were brutalized. Others are representatives of people who were killed. The appeals court ruled that the immunities act did not apply to individuals and sent the case back to Brinkema.
Contact Frank Green at (804) 649-6340 or .