Terry Foucha, a criminal defendant, was charged with aggravated burglary and a fire arms offense. On October 12, 1984, Foucha was found not guilty by reason of insanity and was ordered committed to a mental institution until medically discharged or released pursuant to a court order. In March 1988, doctors evaluated Foucha and determined that he was “presently in remission from mental illness, [but] [w]e cannot certify that he would not constitute a menace to himself or to others if released.” There was testimony from one doctor that Foucha had “an antisocial personality, a condition that is not a mental disease, and that is untreatable.” Based on these opinions, the court ordered that Foucha remain in the mental institution because he posed a danger to himself as well as others. Under state law, a person who has been acquitted of criminal charges because of insanity but who is no longer insane can only be released from commitment if he can prove that he is not a danger to himself or to society. Does the statutory scheme violate Foucha’s liberty rights under the Due Process Clause?