Regulatory Laws on Personal Statutes

Regulatory Laws are known as Administrative Laws.

Statutory Laws are laws established by an act of Legislature.

The most interesting form of statutes are those called Personal Statutes.

A personal statute is something that one is assumed to "carry with him wherever he goes." Being a sex offender creates that personal statute. Sex offenders are told where they can live, who gets to know their personal business, if they can congregate, and if they have any rights. These statutes are all based off of a crime committed.

Sex Offender Laws are also considered "regulatory" in Smith v. Doe. The argument here was that the statutes were not illegal because they were "regulatory" and not "punitive." They merely wanted (their intent) to control the sex offenders and not punish them. Punishing them would have been Double Jeopardy. But, regulating their lives wasn't considered to be punishment. If they broke from the statute, then they were brought up on new charges.

The punishment only comes from the deviation from the regulation, and not from the regulation itself.

But, there is a problem with their thinking. Putting a personal statute on someone based on their criminal history creates a Bill of Pains and Penalties. Not only that, but the Supreme Court ruled that "...the constitutional prohibition may not be evaded by giving a civil form to a measure that is essentially criminal."

Creating a "regulatory" statute that has a punitive effect (even if the intent is to merely regulate) based off of a crime committed is wholly unconstitutional. Creating a regulation of a "personal statute" nature creates a "cruel and unusual" punishment aspect, as well as violating Double Jeopardy issues.

Sex Offender Laws, whether seen as Regulatory or Punitive, are still Unconstitutional.

And there are other Registries being made every day off of the success of the Sex Offender Registry.