October Term 2001 · Docket 00-1187
Can Kansas force sex offenders to join a treatment program?
Prisoners challenge a rule that denies privileges for refusing therapy.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Wiltanger argued that other crimes carry similar penalties.
Mr. McAllister stated that choices have consequences.
Mr. Garre noted the federal program allows voluntary participation.
Chief Justice Rehnquist closed the argument.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 25-5 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 25-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 25-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 25-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 5-5 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 5-5
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Kansas requires sex offenders to join a treatment program. Refusal strips inmates of visitation and work rights. The state claims this protects safety. Inmates argue this violates their rights.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 25-5 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 25-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 25-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 25-23
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 28, 2001.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 5-5 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 5-5
What each side wants
Kansas wants to keep the mandatory program rule.
The prisoners want the rule struck down.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 25-5 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 25-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 25-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 25-23
What each side says
Kansas argues the rule serves a penological interest.
The prisoners argue the rule infringes on liberty.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 25-5 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 25-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 25-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 25-23
What the justices asked
Does the rule serve a legitimate penological interest?
Is the rule reasonably related to that interest?
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 5-5 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 5-5
Why it matters
Prisoners face loss of basic rights for refusing therapy. States gain tools to manage high-risk inmates. This case defines the limits of prison discipline.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 25-5 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 25-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 25-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 25-23
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 5-5 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 5-5
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 25-5 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 25-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 25-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 25-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 25-5 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 25-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 25-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 25-23
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.