Opinion ID: 1040975
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Adam Walsh Act

Text: We begin with a brief examination of the purpose of the Adam Walsh Act. The Act was enacted in 2006 [t]o protect children from sexual exploitation and violent crime. Pub. L. No. 109-248, 120 Stat. 587 (2006). To further this goal, the Act amends and supplements existing civil commitment provisions to allow the federal government to seek court-ordered civil commitment of certain sexually dangerous persons in custody. See id. § 302 (codified at 18 U.S.C. §§ 4241, 4247, 4248). The Act vests the Attorney General, any person authorized by the Attorney General, or the Director of the Bureau of Prisons with the power to certify that an individual in custody is a sexually dangerous person. Id. § 4248(a). This certification is then transferred to the district court which must order a hearing to determine whether the person is a sexually dangerous person. Id. At this hearing, the government bears the burden of demonstrating by clear and convincing evidence that the inmate is in fact a sexually dangerous person, by showing that the individual: 1) has engaged or attempted to engage in sexually violent conduct or child molestation, 2) suffers from a serious mental illness, abnormality, or disorder, and 3) as a result of this disorder he would have serious difficulty in refraining from -11- sexually violent conduct or child molestation if released. Id. §§ 4247(a)(5)-(6), 4248(d). The Supreme Court has noted that the clear and convincing evidence standard is an intermediate standard somewhere between a preponderance of the evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt, Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418, 425 (1979), requiring proof that the government's assertions are highly probable, Colorado v. New Mexico, 467 U.S. 310, 316-17 (1984).