FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                          AG
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1995                         (202) 616-2771
                                               TDD (202) 514-1888

                  ATTORNEY GENERAL'S STATEMENT 

In January, a federal district court in New Jersey blocked a
state law requiring notice to a community when a rapist released
from prison was about to move there.

New Jersey is one of 40 states that have enacted a requirement
that sex offenders be registered where they live.  16 states did
so last year.  The Crime Bill encourages all the states to adopt
community notification procedures for violent sexual predators.

The President is vigorously supporting this provision and the
Department of Justice intends to back the State of New Jersey in
defending its law against Constitutional attack.  

The law, refered to as Megan's law, was named for a victim of a
convicted sex criminal.  Megan's law requires convicted child
molesters and violent sex offenders to register with law
enforcement agencies where they intend to live after their
release from prison, and provides for community notification of
their presence. 

We are entering the case for several reasons:

  First, Congress and the administration noted the federal      
    government's concern when the Crime Bill measure was enacted
   last year.  The federal government has a major interest        
   in seeing to it that the constitutionality of such efforts     
   is sustained in the courts.  

  Second, we feel strongly that the states must have the      
   flexibility to enact laws that they believe will provide       
   immediate and necessary protection, as New Jersey has done     
   in this case.  Convicted child molesters have a recidivism     
   rate as high as 40-75% according to some studies.  The public  
   deserves a fair chance to be on guard.

In the days ahead, the form and format of our participation will
be clarified.  But, our intent should be unmistakable -- which is
to defend such laws against constitutional challenge.
95-083