A judge recently decided to keep a sexual offender behind bars after he finished his 10-year prison sentence, and the Supreme Court may follow the precedent set by the judge.

The pedophile, who was convicted of molesting two 12-year-old boys, should have been on his way to freedom in 1994, except for concerns that he may still be a threat to society.

Under Constitutional law, however, a prison term is just that — a term or period of time a prisoner should spend behind bars. Any time spent in prison longer than that term is an obstruction to a person’s civil liberties.

Even if a person does pose a specific threat upon release, courts should decide at the initial sentencing if there should be a condition in the ruling that would give officials the option of holding a prisoner longer if concern for behavior is present.

Under law, it doesn’t matter if a person has a history of criminal activities.

Even if a person did not respond well to rehabilitation or is still a threat to society, that person should be released when the prison term is up. It doesn’t matter under law … even if it should matter.

This is a dangerous pattern developing in America’s legal system. It may be a sign that there is a problem and that something needs to be changed. Logically, a criminal who still may be a threat should be detained for the safety of the public.

However, the United States’ justice system is written to protect its inhabitants from a totalitarian way of thinking which, at times, infringes on a person’s rights. This type of justice does just that.

This pedophile should be released and, sadly, trusted at least until he breaks the law again. It’s in the Constitution. The judge and the Supreme Court should take the time to read it.