Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • Freed Up
    • The Soho Forum Debates
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Log In

Create new account

Civil Liberties

Juvenile Sex Offender Registry Requirement Before Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 5.5.2014 2:40 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Pennsylvania Supreme Court/Twitter

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is weighing whether it's constitutional to force all juvenile sex offenders to sign up with the state sex offender registry. Lawyers say the registration requirement amounts to cruel and unusual punishment. 

As of 2012, Pennsylvania law requires anyone 14 years of age or older who is convicted of rape, aggravated indecent assault, or the conspiracy to commit one of these crimes to register for life with the state's sex offender registry. They can petition for removal from the registry only after 25 years, and only if they've had no subsequent offenses, even of a non-sexual nature.

The case comes before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court after an appeal by the state of a lower court's ruling. In November 2013, a judge weighing the case, brought in the interest of seven juvenile sex offenders, ruled that the registration law violated the state constitution.

"As is all too common with juvenile sex offenders, their lives too have been marred by tragedies, traumas, addictions, abuse and personal victimization," wrote Common Pleas Judge John C. Uhler in his decision. "Fortunately, as is also common with juvenile offenders, they have demonstrated a great capacity and willingness to rehabilitate and make better lives for themselves."

According to a report from Human Rights Watch (HRW), juvenile sex offenders have a recidivism rate of about 7 percent, compared to 13 percent for adult sex offenders (and 45 percent for all crimes). Recidivism concerns are the main reason given for requiring juvenile sex offenders to register long-term with the state. 

But as youth offenders try to rebuild their lives, being on the sex offender registries can seriously hinder their chances of doing so. Being on the registry means restrictions on where they can live, work, go to school, and spend time. And once on the registry, juvenile offenders must verify their information in person every 90 days or face mandatory felony prosecution, which carries a prison sentence of at least three to seven years.

Effectively, the requirement can shuffle juvenile offenders back into the prison system for matters unrelated to re-offending, at any time during the next few decades. "These onerous reporting and registration requirements … set up youth for failure and inevitable subsequent criminal court involvement," says the Juvenile Law Center, a nonprofit juvenile law advocacy organization which argued the case of one of the juvenile offenders. 

According to the Associated Press, Pennsylvania judges increasingly agree with juvenile law advocates that automatic registries undermine rehabilitation efforts and force judges to treat all offenders the same, without taking context into account. 

Each U.S. state has its own set of sex offender laws and registry requirements, and some are more severe for young offenders than Pennsylvania's. Sex offender registry requiring offenses can range from crimes like rape and molestation to things like public nudity or consensual sex between teens. "Many people assume that anyone listed on the sex offender registry must be a rapist or a pedophile," HRW fellow Nicole Pittman said. "But most states spread the net much more widely."

For a more in-depth look at sex offender registries in the U.S., check out this 2012 report from Reason TV.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Ukraine: 'This Is War,' Says Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

Civil LibertiesSex Offender RegistryPolicePennsylvania
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (35)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Hyperion   12 years ago

    Good grief, first the suspension of the 4th amendment in PA, and now more fascist shit?

    PA has went full on retard.

  2. Hyperion   12 years ago

    Anyway, with shit like this and the recent 'every woman on campus is being raped by every male, all of the time', let's just cut to the fucking chase and put every male on a list, at birth, for being male.

    Then, the Feminazis and the Muslims can fight the end all to all wars, until everyone is dead. Problem solved.

    1. Zeb   12 years ago

      Stop giving them ideas.

      1. Hyperion   12 years ago

        There isn't any possibility that I can give them any ideas half as deranged as the ones they will come up with on their own.

  3. sarcasmic   12 years ago

    I'm wondering when sex offenders are going to get microchipped. I mean, that's the next step, right? They want to put chips into everyone, right? Sex offenders are the logical place to start. They're not human. They're sex offenders. Then what, felons? Then once it becomes common enough, parents will ask that their children be chipped, then it will be a requirement for public schools, and before you know it everyone is sporting a government microchip!

    /adjusts foil hat

    1. William of Purple   12 years ago

      the sex offenders.

      1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

        Band name!

    2. Episiarch   12 years ago

      In David Brin's Sundiver he introduces the idea of "Probationers" who are people that are tested to see if they have "violent tendencies" (the test is very subjective) and if they are deemed to have them, they are chipped and not allowed in certain areas. He seems to have introduced the idea to explore the subjects of pre-crime and the like, but then unfortunately lets the subject go as the book goes on and doesn't really do much with it.

      1. Hyperion   12 years ago

        That's weak tea. What's really needed is some sort of thought wave monitors in all public places. Then anytime some guy looks at a womans ass in tight jeans and thinks, 'Wow, I'd bang that', out from the shadows comes the thought police to immediately arrest and put him on all the lists and strip him of all constitutional rights. This is the brave new proggie paradise. All unpure thoughts shall be purged from the world, it will be heaven. You will 'choose purity', or it will be chosen for you.

        1. Idle Hands   12 years ago

          just cut to chase and neuter all the men.

        2. Zeb   12 years ago

          Gonna need a lot of thought police. And they'll all have to be frigid women or eunuchs.

          1. Hyperion   12 years ago

            I don't know, every time the government offers jobs that involve violating other peoples right, they seem to line up in droves. I doubt this will be any different. Offer a good paying cushy job, and no matter how despicable the job duties are, there will be plenty willing to do it.

            1. Zeb   12 years ago

              But they will have to arrest pretty much every man they see.
              Though I suppose if as is usual with police they don't have to follow most of the rules they are meant to enforce, you shouldn't have any recruitment problems.

        3. Rasilio   12 years ago

          I read a sci fi short where a communist party takes over the earth, scientists devise a way to test the loyalty of a person by remotely reading their brain waves and are forced to develop this into a weaponized system that instantly kills anyone disloyal to the party. They then deploy these to every government installation on the planet and turn them on.

          Turns out the scientist was disloyal and "reversed the polarity" so that it basically assasinated the entire party hierarchy pretty much simultaneously.

    3. Fr?ulein Nikki   12 years ago

      Don't parents already ask for their children to be chipped? They ask for them to be fingerprinted, and pet owners do the chip thing, so I just assumed.

      1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

        I know people chip their pets, but I've never heard of chipping children. That's creepy.

        1. Fr?ulein Nikki   12 years ago

          It just wouldn't surprise me, is all.

          1. Warty   12 years ago

            It apparently hasn't happened yet. But brace yourself.

        2. Zeb   12 years ago

          Children who are not babies are usually a lot better at identifying themselves than pets are. The chips don't work for tracking, just identification from close up, so there wouldn't be a lot of point putting them in your children. Yet. Probably in 10 years it will be unthinkable not too. 20 years ago I never would have guessed that 7 year olds would be riding in car seats.

          1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

            The only reason they're in car seats is because of mandatory air bags.

            1. Zeb   12 years ago

              In the back seat?

              I thought riding in the front was right out for anyone under 16 anymore.

              1. Brett L   12 years ago

                Fucking Florida just raised the mandatory car seat age to like, 17. Motherfucking scum. Make it just that much more expensive for no harm reduction.

                1. Zeb   12 years ago

                  When I was 5 and my state first had a law requiring anyone under 6 to wear a seat belt, I was pissed.

                  I survived just fine rolling around on the floor or in the way-back.

            2. Zeb   12 years ago

              I don't know if they still do it, but in my two seat truck there is a key hole that you can use to turn off the passenger airbag, presumably for when small people likely to be damaged by airbags are riding there.

      2. Brett L   12 years ago

        You know the fingerprinting is so that the coroner's office has an easier time, not the detectives, if the kid goes missing, right?

  4. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

    These are the kinds of things they think up in a state capital that has full-time legislators where there should be a fraction of the number and part-time.

    1. Zeb   12 years ago

      You don't want too few, though. Then it's too easy for them to agree on stuff and move things along quickly.

  5. Jordan   12 years ago

    Screw this half-assed shit. Microchip everyone at birth and send their fingerprints and a DNA sample to the FBI. If it saves just one life...

    FOR TEH CHILDRENZ!!1

  6. Meerkatx   12 years ago

    Oh come on now. How do we expect for profit prisons to remain good business if we don't ensure people can easily become prisoners?

    1. Hyperion   12 years ago

      Well, to be fair, eveyone... I mean, the serfs, are committing 3 felonies a day, and most of them are getting away with it! Anarchy!

  7. R C Dean   12 years ago

    Of all the reasons why minors shouldn't be put on registries, well, this is probably the worst:

    their lives too have been marred by tragedies, traumas, addictions, abuse and personal victimization

    Because of the FEELZ!

  8. Number 2   12 years ago

    "According to a report from Human Rights Watch (HRW), juvenile sex offenders have a recidivism rate of about 7 percent, compared to 13 percent for adult sex offenders (and 45 percent for all crimes)."

    Wait a minute! I thought that all sex offenders were subhuman, perverted weirdos who could never reform and were 100%+ likely to repeat their crimes because the perverts simply cannot control themselves! You don't mean to tell me that legislators were exaggerating, do you? Because that would never happen.

    1. Zeb   12 years ago

      The big problem there is who gets lumped into the sex offenders category. When it includes people who get blowjobs in the bushes at night and who urinate in public on the list, of course most aren't going to be serious pervs who can't help themselves. And even if you look at just rapists and child molesters, the recidivism rate is probably higher than 13%, but still probably lower than a lot of people imagine.

  9. Mr. Weebles   12 years ago

    Lawyers say the registration requirement amounts to cruel and unusual punishment.

    Although I'm hesitant to be seen as sympathetic to adult sex offenders, if registration is "cruel and unusual punishment" for juveniles, why isn't it considered the same for adult sex offenders?

  10. Bob Mitchell   12 years ago

    I like this judge's thinking. He is informed and compassionate.I've had experience with kids in this situation and it becomes clear real fast if their habitual.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Republicans Want To Borrow Every Single Dollar of the $72 Billion Bill To Fund ICE and Trump's Ballroom

Eric Boehm | 5.6.2026 1:55 PM

How a Scientific Cartel Protects Fraudsters and Rakes in Billions of Taxpayer Dollars

Seconds | 5.6.2026 12:00 PM

Louisiana Says Men Are Spiking Women's Drinks With Abortion Pills. There's Scant Evidence of That.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 5.6.2026 11:00 AM

Trump's Bluff to Iran Didn't Work

Matthew Petti | 5.6.2026 10:04 AM

Damned if You Do

Liz Wolfe | 5.6.2026 9:30 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2026 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks