A Motion for Preliminary Injunction was filed on February 19 asking the U.S. District Court to stop implementation of International Megan’s Law (formerly HR 515 and now Public Law 114-119). If granted, the motion would temporarily prohibit the federal government from both adding a conspicuous, unique identifier to the passports of registrants and notifying foreign countries of registrants’ plans to travel internationally.
Six declarations were Included with the Motion, including declarations from the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA), Dr. Tom Tobin of Sharper Future and criminal defense attorney Alex Landon. The declarations of by ATSA and Dr. Tobin included statements that International Megan’s Law will not halt child sex trafficking and could result in significant harm to hundreds of thousands of registrants.
“We are grateful for the support of ATSA in our efforts to stop implementation of International Megan’s Law,” stated CA RSOL president Janice Bellucci. ATSA is an international organization dedicated to preventing sexual abuse through research, evidence-based practice, public policy and community strategies that lead to the effective assessment, treatment, and management of individuals who have sexually abused or are at risk to abuse.
A hearing date of March 30 was requested when the motion was filed. The federal government’s response to the motion is currently due on March 4, however, both dates could be postponed if the government requests a delay.
Related
Motion for Preliminary Injunction
James said “Were there 2,300 arrests for overseas sex crimes in 2014”
I replied “No. There were 2300 arrests for domestic and overseas crimes. I would imagine none of those arrested were registrants since Angel Watch has been in place, according to the Government, over 5 years. 2014 is only 2 years ago.”
I should have said…”No. There were 2300 arrests for domestic and overseas crimes. I would imagine none of those arrested for overseas crimes were registrants since Angel Watch has been in place, according to the Government, over 5 years, 2014 is only 2 years ago.”
Imagining using the numbers from the ICE article/statement or the ‘4500 passports issued to registrants in 2008’ to justify IML would be a stretch in any rational examination of this issue.
I would like to thank anonymously for such a thorough and smart response…I wrote a lengthy reply but, somehow it got lost in the ether that often inter-spaces our existence…maybe for the best.
Still, I would like to…maybe be a little more active in this cause…bad numbers are bad, bad for everyone, bad for policymakers and us alike.
I did some research a long time ago with violent juveniles and this kind of tomfoolery with numbers would never get past my thesis committee…I would have been laughed off campus…
I suppose the Government can get away with this because it is political and has nothing to do with discerning the truth…but someone should learn how to hold their feet to the fire on this.
There are true numbers to be had…they may be good, they may be bad…but they exist.
The question becomes one of how to force them to the surface.
Hummm
But thanks for all the intelligent commentary on this vexing question.
Best Wishes, James