United States v. Comstock
| United States v. Comstock | |
|---|---|
| Argued January 12, 2010 Decided May 17, 2010 | |
| Full case name | United States, Petitioner v. Graydon Earl Comstock, Jr., et al. |
| Docket no. | 08-1224 |
| Citations | 560 U.S. 126 (more) 130 S. Ct. 1949; 176 L. Ed. 2d 878 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 507 F. Supp. 2d 522 (E.D.N.C. 2007); affirmed, 551 F.3d 274 (4th Cir. 2009); cert. granted, 557 U.S. 918 (2009). |
| Subsequent | On remand, 627 F.3d 513 (4th Cir. 2010). |
| Holding | |
| The federal government may order the civil commitment of a mentally ill, sexually dangerous person beyond the conclusion of his federal sentence. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Breyer, joined by Roberts, Stevens, Ginsburg, Sotomayor |
| Concurrence | Kennedy (in judgment) |
| Concurrence | Alito (in judgment) |
| Dissent | Thomas, joined by Scalia (all but Part III–A–1–b) |
United States v. Comstock, 560 U.S. 126 (2010), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, which held that the federal government has authority under the Necessary and Proper Clause to require the civil commitment of individuals already in Federal custody. The practice, introduced by the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, was upheld against a challenge that it fell outside the enumerated powers granted to Congress by the Constitution. The decision did not rule on any other aspect of the law's constitutionality, because only the particular issue of Congressional authority was properly before the Court.