[Updated with media links] The California Supreme Court today denied review of a lower court’s decision that, in effect, bans cities and counties from enforcing ordinances that restrict where a registered citizen may be present or near.  Review by the Court was requested by the Orange County District Attorney.

“Today’s decision is a major victory,” stated CA RSOL President Janice Bellucci.  “Through its denial to review a lower court decision, the California Supreme Court has ruled that ordinances in more than 70 cities and 5 counties are preempted by existing state law.”

The Supreme Court’s decision also strengthens the five lawsuits filed recently in federal district courts against cities that have ordinances which contain presence restrictions.   The lawsuits have been filed against Pomona, South Lake Tahoe, National City, Carson and Lompoc.

“More than 105,000 registered citizens and their families may now lawfully visit public and private locations including libraries, museums, parks, beaches, and movie theaters,” stated CA RSOL board member and attorney Chance Oberstein.

The lower court decision for which review was denied was a challenge by the Orange County Public Defender Office of an ordinance adopted by the City of Irvine.  The challenge involved a registered citizen who was arrested and convicted of violating the ordinance when he played tennis in the city’s public tennis courts.

Park ban on sex offenders up to state, court agrees (OC Register)
Top Court Declines to Hear Case, Striking Ban on Sex Offenders in OC Parks (
High court rejects appeal on sex-offender rules (Sacramento Bee)
Court refuses to review decision tossing out Orange County bans against sex offenders (SCPR)
Sex Offenders Can Roam More Freely Under California High Court Move (LA Weekly)

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Janice I didn’t receive notice where the party is going to be held…a thank you and congrads to you and your team is in order.

It is my prayer that reason and compassion will have our leaders moving to do what is right not just what is popular and repeal the sex offender registry completely.

We still have much work ahead, but this news is extremely encouraging! Blessings to all of you. It is fitting that this news came just after Easter Sunday. The Lord I’m sure also had a hand in this. Blessings to All.

Did the O.C. District Attorney office overstep their boundary By chasing this lost cause to the door of the Supreme Court after the ‘County Park Ban’ author and Chairman of the Board of supervisors Shawn Nelson Stated they would not waste anymore Taxpayer money pursuing it? Is it the D.A.’s Job to pass law’s or simply enforce them? I guess the D.A.’s office has a bigger budget and are not worried about wasting taxpayers dollars.
Please tell me this was the final chapter of these local presence restrictions and we can move on. If so, any city foolish enough not to pay heed to Janice’ simple request deserves what they get.

AWESOME!!!!! Janice, et al: You have stood up and stared down tyranny victoriously! Congratulations! Now, may the dominoes begin to fall.

“Janice Bellucci, president of California Reform Sex Offender Laws, said of the pending appeal. “I think they’re foolish to do it. They’re wasting taxpayer money.” ” Jan 13, 2014


Will this decision have any effect on the current suits against Pomona, S. Lake Tahoe, National City, Carson, and Lompoc?

Janice, Chance, and the rest of the people that worked towards making this miracle possible; Congratulations and thank you.

I think I’ll hit the hiking trails tomorrow in the county nature preserve that is right next to my residence.

Not dominos, but stubborn, ignorant, greedy apathetic, frightened people stand in the path towards freedom. Believe me, they do not like being knocked down and they are very powerful. Let’s use this as inspiration to give a little more to the cause. We have been the lifeless dominos that have fell to their laws. Those that have stood firm, protect the others. Thank you to all those who stood firm in the courtroom and kept the restrictions from burying us alive. Time we all stood a little more firm.

Excellent news!

I’d like to have a party at one of national city’s park!
why? Their Mayor is so stubborn on fighting this!!

Ill go and will even pick people up on the way down there.


After having a terrible week (in more ways than words can express .. and nothing to do with being a RSO) … this FANTASTIC NEWS!

Sometime ago I wrote that Janice drew a line in the sand daring them to cross it. They did. Now look what they got for crossing the line.

Time to fight back!!

What’s next ?

Removing the Megan’s law website?

What a great accomplishment!! Janice, thank you for never giving up and fighting for what is right. Unfortunately, we will still be on probation for 3 years, and the PO clearly stated that he can NOT enter ANY park. He even had him repeat it….not sure if this victory will help us for now (I hope so), but I am sooo happy for everyone else. Thank You!!!

WOOOO!! VICTORY! Time to go to the park with my toddlers without looking over my shoulder!!

In all the celebration, there should be some sober reminders to put out.

Technically, the Supreme Court did NOT uphold the lower court’s decision, but rather punted it back. This means that the only jurisdiction that the ban to ordinances can be enforced is in the court that rendered the original decision. In that regard, by no means is this decision “settled” in this regard.

Granted, this gives more weight to our position, as it could signal to municipalities that to fight the law would be potentially more expensive, but technically, they aren’t breaking any court decisions if the municipality is outside the jurisdiction of the original court.

Just my two cents, and hope that it doesn’t stop anyone’s resolve. Yes, the decision is better than if the court took the case and reversed the ban, but it’s nowhere near as good as if the case would have taken the case and decided in our favor.

Thank you Janice and our brave Frank. You both did a great job. There is hope after all.

A happy result, but some caution is in order. A likely consequence is that the forces of reaction and political opportunism will sponsor a ballot initiative to put these presence restrictions in place in all of California. Crap law is all too easy to implement in California through the initiative process, Jessica’s law being the outstanding example.

The self-righteous John & Ken at KFI are about to talk about to talk about this if anyone cares to listen in

So, I do have to ask a point of clarification. Does this law also affect where someone may reside?

But how do we overcome most people’s ignorance and closed mindlessness? People always want someone to hate. They still have the old books that lists the witches killed that were going to steal (or had stolen) children’s soul’s.

What about schools? Can I take my 8 year old to school? My sister is a teacher. Can I meet her for lunch? No one is talking about this. Only Parks, Libraries, Amusement Parks, ETC….. Janice?

This is fantastic news! What, if anything … does this mean with residency restrictions … like in Cypress (Orange County, of course!) … do we smell victory there too???

Monumentous HomeRun …..whewwwwwwewwww….like a much needed 3run HomeRun to win…….its benchmark Homer … …..and over that oc shop office in your face wrong….whewwwwwwwww.!!HomeRun

Could it be that the logical progression would be to go after certain LE agencies that post their own web information? This field is also occupied by state law and the state’s website should be the only authority on this matter. Again the state law issues the ultimate guidelines on dissemination of this information and should prevent other (local) jurisdictions from pursuing their own published information which is more sensationalist than practical in many cases.

This section of law needs to be rewritten to prevent ANY commercial exploitation of this information, especially since much of what we have seen in the private sector is based on the same invalid assumptions that were built into this quagmire (body of law.)