Sex Offender Residence Restrictions: Sensible Crime Policy or Flawed Logic?
Jill Levenson, Ph.D., Lynn University
Kristen Zgoba, Ph.D., New Jersey Department of Corrections
Richard Tewksbury, Ph.D., University of Louisville
Sexual Violence is a social problem that inspires immense fear and wrath in our society. As such, public policies designed to monitor and restrict sex offenders are becoming increasingly popular in the United States. Since 1994, the Jacob Wetterling Act has required convicted sex offenders to register their addresses with law enforcement agents to facilitate better tracking and monitoring of these particular criminals. Megan’s Law, enacted in 1996, modified the Jacob Wetterling Act by allowing registry information to be disclosed to the public. These laws were the initial stepping stones and evolved from registration to notification and now include housing restrictions. As a result of this progression, at least 22 states and hundreds of local municipalities in the U.S. have passed laws prohibiting sex offenders from living within close proximity (usually 1,000 to 2,500 feet) to schools, parks, playgrounds, day care centers, and other places where children congregate (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2006; Nieto & Jung, 2006).
The effectiveness of residence restrictions policies on sex crime prevention is largely unknown because empirical investigations of this topic are virtually absent in the literature. While there is wide consensus on the need for improved community safety from sex offenders, there is considerable debate as to whether current criminal justice responses intended to reduce sexual offending are successful (Edwards & Hensley, 2001; Levenson, 2003; Levenson & D’Amora, 2007; Petersilia, 2003; Prentky, 1996; Welchans, 2005; Zgoba, 2004). Hampering the ability of stakeholders to make informed decisions is the complete lack of empirical data on the effects of residence restrictions on rates of sexual offending and recidivism. Yet, sex offender housing laws have enjoyed overwhelming support as they have swept across the United States.
Twenty-two states now have laws restricting where sex offenders can live, with 1,000 to 2,500-foot exclusionary zones being most common (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2006; Nieto & Jung, 2006). Since a series of highly publicized murders of several young children by convicted sex offenders around the country in 2005, hundreds of cities and towns nationwide have also passed local ordinances, often increasing restricted zones to 2,500 feet. Some of these regulations have allowed a “grandfather clause” for sex offenders who established residency prior to the passage of the law, and some (but not all) waive restrictions for juvenile or statutory offenders. Some localities have made it a crime for landlords to rent to sex offenders, making it more difficult for them to secure rental properties.
Read the entire article on uscourts.gov/
