In 1989, a young boy from Tacoma, Washington was abducted, raped, choked, and stabbed. This case and several other related incidents led to approval of the Sexually Violent Predators Act. The act provides for postsentence, indefinite civil commitment for sexually violent predators; those convicted of or charged with a crime of sexual violence and suffering from a mental abnormality or personality disorder. The act contrasts with sexual offender statutes in other States that provide for commitment in lieu of sentencing. The author contends that the act is too vague, that it is an impermissible violation of due process guarantees, and that it does not afford equal protection to all individuals who are situated equally. Individuals will be committed under a minimalist requirement, yet this low threshold will work against them when they seek release. Professionals will be reluctant to deem individuals safe to be at large, and repeat sex offenders will remain locked up with little hope for treatment, rehabilitation, and subsequent release. 165 footnotes