California Supreme Court rules on oral sex

In The News:

03/06/06

Sacramento (AP) - California's justices overturned state law requiring adults 21 years or older who are convicted of having oral sex with 16- and 17-year-olds to automatically register as a sex offender for life.

The California Supreme Court, ruling 6-1, said the law, first adopted in 1947, was unconstitutional.

The majority said that the law was too harsh or unfair because adults 21 or older who are convicted of having sex with minors ages 16 and 17 are not automatically required to register as sex offenders.

The justices pointed out that lawmakers declined to treat both categories of offenders equally three times in the last 10 years.

The court noted that, because the law did not treat the two categories of sex offenders similarly, the law violated both state and federal equal protection rights.

"Mandatory lifetime registration of all persons who, like defendant here, were convicted of voluntary oral copulation with a minor of the age of 16 or 17, but not of someone convicted of voluntary sexual intercourse with a minor of the same age, violates the equal protection clauses of the federal and state constitutions," Justice Joyce Kennard wrote for the majority.

Adults who have sexual activity with children under 16 are required to register.

The state maintains a public database with personal information of registered sex offenders.

The justices, however, left intact a provision granting trial judges the discretion to demand registration for both categories of adult sex offenders - those that have oral sex or intercourse with minors ages 16 and 17.

The case was brought by Vincent Hofsheier of Santa Cruz County, who was convicted in 2003 of having oral sex with a 16-year-old girl.

He was sentenced to 120 days in jail.

Neither his attorney, Paul Couenhoven, nor the California Attorney General's office returned calls for comment.

Justice Marvin Baxter was the lone dissent.

"As any teenager or adult knows, intercourse is distinct from oral copulation, involving a wholly different sexual act that, unlike oral copulation, may result in pregnancy and the birth of a child," he wrote.

"Given this significant difference in the potential real-life consequences of the two acts, the Legislature reasonably could decide that different registration schemes for the two groups of offenders are appropriate as a matter of public policy."

The case is People v. Hofsheier, S124636.

And Also:

Mar 6, 6:34 PM (ET)

By CHET BROKAW

PIERRE, S.D. (AP) - Gov. Mike Rounds signed legislation Monday that would ban most abortions in South Dakota, a law he acknowledged would be tied up in court for years while the state challenges the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

The bill would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless the procedure was necessary to save the woman's life. It would make no exception for cases of rape or incest.

The governor issued a written statement saying he expected a lengthy legal battle over the law, which, he said, would not take effect unless the U.S. Supreme Court upheld it.

"In the history of the world, the true test of a civilization is how well people treat the most vulnerable and most helpless in their society. The sponsors and supporters of this bill believe that abortion is wrong because unborn children are the most vulnerable and most helpless persons in our society. I agree with them," Rounds said in the statement.

The governor declined all media requests for interviews Monday.

The Legislature passed the bill last month after supporters argued that the recent appointment of conservative justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito have made the U.S. Supreme Court more likely to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Abortion opponents already are offering money to help the state pay legal bills for the anticipated court challenge, Rounds has said. Lawmakers said an anonymous donor has pledged $1 million to defend the ban, and the Legislature set up a special account to accept donations for legal fees.

Some other states are considering similar bans on abortion.

Under the new law, doctors could get up to five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion.

Rounds noted that it was written to make sure existing restrictions would still be enforced during the legal battle. Current state law sets increasingly stringent restrictions on abortions as pregnancy progresses; after the 24th week, the procedure is allowed only to protect the woman's health and safety.

Kate Looby, state director of Planned Parenthood, said the organization has not yet decided whether to challenge the measure in court or to seek a statewide public vote in November. A referendum would either repeal the abortion ban or delay a court challenge to the legislation.

"Obviously, we're very disappointed that Governor Rounds has sided on the side of politics rather than on the side of the women of South Dakota to protect their health and safety," Looby said.

Planned Parenthood runs the state's single abortion clinic, which performs about 800 abortions each year.