Opinion ID: 716733
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Actual Purpose

Text: 119 The first prong of our test asks whether the legislature's actual purpose was to punish. See De Veau, 363 U.S. at 160, 80 S.Ct. at 1154-55. The only indication of actual legislative intent regarding the enacted version of Megan's Law is the following statement of purpose in the legislation itself: 1. The Legislature finds and declares: 120 a. The danger of recidivism posed by sex offenders and offenders who commit other predatory acts against children, and the dangers posed by persons who prey on others as a result of mental illness, require a system of registration that will permit law enforcement officials to identify and alert the public when necessary for the public safety. 121 b. A system of registration of sex offenders and offenders who commit other predatory acts against children will provide law enforcement with additional information critical to preventing and promptly resolving incidents involving sexual abuse and missing persons. 122 N.J.S.A. 2C:7-1. This passage suggests that the legislature's actual purpose was not punishment. It speaks of identify[ing] and alert[ing] the public to enhance safety and preventing and promptly resolving incidents. Protecting the public and preventing crimes are the types of purposes De Veau found regulatory and not punitive. 363 U.S. at 160, 80 S.Ct. at 1154-55. 123 The only other legislative history, a statement in the bill as introduced in the New Jersey Senate, buttresses the conclusion that the legislature's intent was not to punish. The danger posed by the presence of a sex offender who has committed violent acts against children requires a system of notification to protect the public safety and welfare of the community. Senate Bill No. 14 (introduced September 12, 1994). The section literally speaks of notification, but if the legislature's actual purpose in notification was remedial, it is hard to imagine that its purpose in the predicate and less harsh step of registration was punitive. 124 The circumstances of this enactment, which generated such sparse legislative history, give us pause. Megan's Law was rushed to the Assembly floor as an extraordinary measure, skipping committee consideration and debate entirely. It is just these sudden and strong passions to which men are exposed that the Framers designed the Ex Post Facto and Bill of Attainder Clauses to protect against. Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. (6 Cranch) 87, 137-38, 3 L.Ed. 162 (1810). Nevertheless, the evidence we do have of actual legislative intent points to a non-punitive purpose.