MINEOLA, N.Y. — A decision by New York’s highest court striking down dozens of local laws that set boundaries on where convicted sex offenders may live has rekindled a debate over whether such laws really work to protect children.
New York’s Court of Appeals ruled unanimously last week that only the state has the power to tell offenders where they can and cannot reside, and generally only while they are on parole or supervised release. The ruling effectively struck down more than 130 local laws across the state, many of which went further than state law by imposing such restrictions on offenders for the rest of their lives. Full Article
I realy hope these laws get struck down on more grounds then just preemption and ex post facto they have got to be unconstitutional for other reasons so as to make them unconstitutional on their face and can not be applied at all after a person completes parole or supervision. Even while on parole or supervision there should be solid reason and facts that these laws work before they can be applied.
The whole point being if you keep changing the laws – and continuously apply them retroactively – the former offender in effect keeps getting re-sentenced every time a single iota of code is added to the body of law.
That is the crux of the ex post facto protection. You can’t expect to defend yourself, and have these conditions imposed, in perpetuity.
This is chillingly similar to the movie “Minority Report” in which people are convicted of crimes they are supposed to commit – IN THE FUTURE !?!
The one thing is clear, Laura Ahearn and Parents for Megan’s Law have lived pass their usefullness and if, she is not careful she will be shooting her own foot off.