Sacramento County Ordinance Challenged in Federal Court

A lawsuit challenging a sex offender ordinance adopted by Sacramento County was filed today in federal district court. This lawsuit is the sixth in a series of lawsuits challenging sex offender ordinances adopted by local governments that prohibit the presence of registered citizens within their jurisdictions.

“Sacramento County adopted an ordinance that violates both the state and federal constitutions,” stated attorney Janice Bellucci. “The ordinance is also preempted by state law as determined by the California Court of Appeal in the Nguyen and Godinez cases. The California Supreme Court denied review of those cases and therefore they serve as precedent within the state of California.”

Prior lawsuits were filed against the City of Pomona (March 24), the City of South Lake Tahoe (March 31), National City (April 8), the City of Carson (April 11) and the City of Lompoc (April 21).

“The ordinance adopted by Sacramento County is based upon two myths: (1) that registered citizens have a high rate of re-offense and (2) that strangers commit most sexual assaults,” stated attorney Chance Oberstein. “The facts are that registered citizens on parole commit a second sex offense at the low rate of only 1.8 percent and that more than 90 percent of sexual assaults upon children are committed not by strangers, but instead by family members, teachers, coaches, and the clergy.”

Prior to today’s filing, several cities and one county have repealed their sex offender ordinances. The cities include Lancaster, Palmdale, Lake Forest, and El Centro. The county is El Dorado County.

“Future legal challenges to sex offender ordinances adopted by cities and counties that restrict the presence of registered citizens within their jurisdictions can be expected,” stated Bellucci.

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

Looks like the media is finally on notice. The Sac Bee has already posted their own article.

They seem to forget there is a big differance in people on parole or probation and people that are not. You have guidelines to fallow while on parole, but when you do your time it should be done. People need to respect that and just leave us alone.

I never ceases to amaze me how government officials; especially district attorneys can be so irresponsible that they pass laws without checking out facts, or knowing anything about the subject as they peruse favorite cause; registered citizens. With all the empirical evidence out there that counters their claims there is absolutely no excuse for them to keep these laws and ordinances or to propose new ones.

These people; district attorneys, law enforcement and those that seek public approval for office or appointment are the ones that have the public up in arms and living in fear of anyone they don’t know. These are the ones that by all rights should demonstrate they actually do have integrity by acknowledging the facts and setting the record straight.

Sacramento County District Attorney Jan Scully is blaming Jessica’s Law for their illegal ordinances, claiming it to be unclear. How slimy of her and every other supposedly responsible official throughout the state. If the state thought such drastic restrictions of movement were necessary I’m sure they would have made that known. These people must stop taking the law into their own hands and show a little respect for the state and laws already in place; weather they agree with them or not.

Way to go Janice and Chance!

It’s a bit bold to file against the county of our State Capital. Perhaps those in the Capital will get the hint that violating the rights of any citizen even their new whipping boy that’s on the sex offender registry is Evil and Wrong!

It’s an election year we all should stand on the doorsteps of those being re-elected and those seeking election. We have a Registered sex offender running for Governor(Glenn Champ 3rd in the poles and closing!) for Pete’s sake! Show up, Stand up and Speak up! (as Janice would say)

Saccounty just isn’t getting it…they’re too selfish to see this isn’t an exoffender issue, but a human rights / civil rights issue ….this is bigger than them….this effects everyone ….shut it down sac-county…time to eat all your words swallow your pride…Open your eyes.

Thank you Janice! The light is getting BRIGHTER because of YOU !!!
(I just hope it not the train)

One of the biggest components of idiocy of this law is that it does not delineate registrants that have not been on probation or parole for decades.

Everyone groups all registrants into their own zany definition to satisfy whatever explicit (or implicit) punishment society can levy against this group.

The web site needs to denote status and threat level but as usual the DOJ is dragging it feet because any cleanup of the statute will further underscore how remiss the legislators were when putting in this Rube Goldberg body of law.

The damage to families of registrants who have completed their sentences is far greater than the safety that is being provided. No one in the legislature seems to have the stones to admit to that in public. It is amazing that there are virtually no exposes of the cases of children of registrants whose lives were needlessly shattered in school and social circles. The only thing the legislators did in that regard was to insulate themselves from any downrange consequences. Business as usual.

Thanks to Janice and co. for the chance families to be re-humanized in the wake
of the dehumanization this wreaked upon the innocent children of registrants.

I’m reading today 1 person dead, 6 others wounded during a shooting at a playground in Sacramento.

Those politicians should get a raise, since they know exactly how to keep them kids safe!