Both the U.S. House and Senate have signed off on a bill to brand registered sex offenders as such on their passports and require federal officials to notify foreign governments whenever certain offenders intend to travel there. The bill is now on its way to President Obama; it’s unclear whether he’ll sign.
If he does, it will be “the first time in U.S. history that any such special designation will appear on the passports of any U.S. citizens,” writes lawyer and New America Foundation Senior Fellow David Post at The Volokh Conspiracy, “and I think it should send at least a small chill down all of our spines.” Full Article
What happened to America? How did our great nation go so badly off course? ?
There must be a way to find relief of registration requirements if we are placed into a position where we cannot even leave this country to finally escape this mess.
If we are FORCED to abide by laws here in the homeland, but we don’t agree with them, we should be free to leave the States. If they (our Government) finds ways to force us to be stuck here where we cannot leave, then that itself is forcing us against our will to do something we don’t believe or agree in.
Please tell me that there is a way to address this with legal action? If not then what other methods do we have to escape besides suicide, being murdered, or natural death?
I wrote a long letter to the President on the whitehouse contact page. He can’t possibly approve a law that is so harsh and inhumane without checking the numbers and realizing that they are all made up. It is not just a law, it will ruin people’s lives. Those type of laws can not just be approved by simply listening to made up stories. He has to do his own research. How can anyone live with themselves if this law goes into effect?
No chance in hell Obama uses the veto on this. It would simply go back to Congress to override the veto, and it would simply be speech after speech about how Obama supports child rapists. It would then cause Hillary and Sanders to have to distance themselves by appearing “tough on sex offenders”.
Only chance is the courts. But if the courts allow lifetime GPS monitoring, I doubt they will have a problem with this.
Jason wrote :The US criminal justice system (and immigration system, the military, and Congress general) has been ruining lives and destroying families for a long time before sex offender registration. There’s nothing about this law that is going to cause Obama to have a “hmmmm.. let’s start being humane on this issue!” moment.”
Yes, but it’s not being asked of Obama to reverse Bush’s policies, already in place. This is easier for him not to be the President who signed this Nazi-like precedent in law in the first place.
Jason wrote “No chance in hell Obama uses the veto on this. It would simply go back to Congress to override the veto,…”
I don’t see how he would want this to be his legacy. He would have to aid the same obstructionists who thwarted any part of his presidential agenda they could. I don’t think all of Congress would want their names on this. That’s why the rules were suspended so 5 or 6 could vote on it to pass it. If Obama vetos it and it gets overridden it would require more votes than a majority to override and all of the Congress would have to take a formal vote, if I am not wrong on this. Would these Congresspeople who didn’t want to vote on it Feb 1 with suspension of the rules, now want their names to be on the override, which could hurt their careers later being linked to Nazi-like precedents in the US? I would hope not.
“and it would simply be speech after speech about how Obama supports child rapists. It would then cause Hillary and Sanders to have to distance themselves by appearing “tough on sex offenders”.”
That may have been more accurate over a decade ago. Since then, Iowa and other places, have seen added restrictions to Megans Law be counter-productive and seen the need to reverse course. Ted Cruz won the caucus in Iowa 2 days ago, on the same day of this travesty passing of HR 515. Ted Cruz said he is not a fan of registries of Americans. Even in California, it can be seen the counter-productiveness in many ways including the fostering of a false sense of security, that was present when children were sexually victimized a few years ago at Desert Christian School, founded by George and Sharon Runner. More candidates should follow Cruz’ lead on being anti-registry for Americans.
I Tweeted the President and sent an email to the White House.
Yes, you’re absolutely correct! There’s a phrase: “past performance is no guarantee of future results.” We need to be careful about assuming that what has been the standard operating model for the last thirty or more years will forever continue to be the same operating model. By making that assumption, we can assure its continuation.
This hysteria WILL end. The question is when and how can we help to bring about its demise.
We need to help the President, no matter how unpromising we might think him to be in our assistance, by turning on the pressure RIGHT NOW!
Email and Tweet and Call and Fax him right now and every day until he either signs, or refuses to sign, that horrid bill into law.
Go to this link and copy the image, especially made for Obama, and follow the format of the tweet.
Each tweet you send out should have @potus (his Twitter account) plus as many of the names of White House staff (and anyone else who should know about this travesty) in the body text (WH staff Twitter accounts, below).
Take that same image and attach it to an email and send to Obama and anyone else you can think of, including news media.
Please, we need to flood Twitter with these messages.
Here is the White House staff’s Twitter names:
@Charlie44
@Abramson44
@Alex44
@Ashley44
@Benenati44
@Broderick44
@Brundage44
@Cabinet
@CEAChair
@Cecilia44
@Deese44
@DeeseOMB
@Denis44
@DJ44
@dmbrooks44
@DrBiden
@FLOTUS
@Goldman44
@Hill44
@Hoffine44
@Holst44
@jesseclee44
@JFriedman44
@JoiningForces
@Jordan44
@Katie44
@KLewis44
@KRichards44
@ks44
@LaCasaBlanca
@Lee44
@letsmove
@LincolnTheHawk
@Maley44
@NSC44
@OMB
@OMBPress
@OpenGov
@PAniskoff44
@petesouza
@Phil44
@PressSec
@Price44
@Psaki44
@Racusen44
@ReachHigher
@rhodes44
@Rob44
@RODonnell44
@Rohan44
@Rosholm44
@Schultz44
@Simas44
@Stephanie44
@Tara44
@TheJusticeDept
@Tiller44
@USCTO
@USDS
@Vargas44
@vj44
@VP
@wethepeople
@WhiteHouse
@whitehouseostp
@WHVideo
@WHWeb
Jason wrote “Federal Judges that have ruled in favor of sex offender issues are almost always coming out of the progressive left. No chance in hell Cruz would nominate one of those judges.”
It takes some Republican judges some time perhaps to come around. John Paul Stevens, who wrote the dissenting opinion of 2003 Smith v Doe was appointed by Republicans. And the California Supreme Court, who at least listened to the CASOMB on residency and presence restrictions is majority Republican. As far as Cruz and nominated any judges good on RSO issues, Cruz has come out against NSA spying on phone records. That shows some anti-authoritarianism. The judges he would nominate could then have similar views on authoritarian practices. What Cruz did as TX Solicitor General was done within the framework of being appointed by then Atty General and now TX Governor Greg Abbott, sex trafficking myth promulator and registry expansion supporter idiot. So there is that. I just think that when a man says he’s anti-registry, I would take that man to be anti-all registries and take that man at his word. Especially when Ted Cruz has a campaign ad where he says that when he says he will do something, that is -exactly- and he accentuates the word ‘exactly’ what he will do. Unless he contradicts himself after he said this 2 months ago, I may prefer him to other Republicans candidates, although I am a Bernie supporter. It would be less than credible on Cruz’ part to make a news conference with Megans parents, Walsh, etc, to celebrate an add-on to the registry, when he said 2 months ago that he is not a fan of registries for American citizens. Trump, on the other hand, is willing to challenge Fox News who have been consistently instrumental in passing registry expansion legislation. That is a slight positive for Trump., Also, Trump talks of going after corporations which hide their assets and have tax shelters overseas. Bernie has been consistent on saying he;ll go after this, and Hillary now has also mentioned going after corporate inversion pracices. However, I doubt Hillary would go after FaceBook, who has a fake headquarters and tax shelter in Ireland, since she is hosting fundraisers at Kelly’s pad. Bernie I do think has the integrity to go after a company seen as progressive, but a company that is only diverse in terms of ethnic and gender diversity, but lacks diversity of thought on RSO issues, to put it mildly. Trump , even though he seems to love Twitter, I think could well go after FaceBook and get them to stop their overseas tax shelters, hand over all the records of their business dealings and see who they have bribed. If not, then their assets should be nationalized. I think Zuckerberg/Kelly are only anti-privacy when it’s not their privacy on the line.
I don’t think Obama will veto it or even sign it into law. He probably won’t touch it. Both will backfire on him. If he vetos it he will be seen as sympathetic to the issue and if he signs it he will be seen as contradictory to his justice prison reforms that he has been doing. I wish he would stop it but I think he will just let it go into law by itself. I see this being brought upon and fought in the courts. Hopefully it gets destroyed there once and for all making it illegal to do such nonsense.
http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/32/pocket-veto
Article I, Section 7, Clause 2
Pocket Veto. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocket_veto
If Congress prevents the bill’s return by being adjourned during the 10-day period, and the president does not sign the bill, a “pocket veto” occurs and the bill does not become law. Congress can adjourn and designate an agent to receive veto messages and other communications so that a pocket veto cannot happen, an action Congresses have routinely taken for decades.
Presidents have been reluctant to pursue disputed pocket vetoes to the Supreme Court for fear of an adverse ruling that would serve as a precedent in future cases.
Sent the following message to Obama through the site: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
In regards to HR 515, I deplore you to veto this bill immediately. Do you want to be the president that starts this country off the same way Nazi Germany did? This is the first step down a disastrous rabbit hole and I hope you can see that. First it’s this group of people, and this will open the door to another group and so on.
While ruled as “regulatory,” the continuing punitive measures made against a group of people who have already paid their time are not helping anyone. Not one victim has been saved from the registry. Not one! This measure that builds on false premises will only hurt the civil liberties of citizens.
Honestly I wish you could do more to rid our nation of the hit list known as Megan’s Law too. More people die from this law than are saved by it. But if there’s any one thing you can do to help keep our nation constitutionally sound, you should VETO this bill. Thank you.
Hey MJ,
You said you sent this message to the president, “I deplore you to veto this bill immediately.”
In the famous line of Inigo Montoya, “You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means”
Cheers,
BJ
I encourage all of you to watch President Obama’s speech at the National Prayer Breakfast this week–
https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/02/04/president-obama-faith-great-cure-fear
Is he talking anywhere in that speech to registered citizens or do you think he is only thinking of other groups? You decide. Anyway, I challenge all of you to hold him to his words.
If you prefer to read the transcript rather than watch the video then you can read it here:
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-04/obama-2016-national-prayer-breakfast-transcript
Chris Smith has ‘Grave Concern’ at Obama Administration Complicity in Human Trafficking.
http://chrissmith.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=398706
Perhaps this means that Rep. Smith does not have the support of the President.
Years ago on Monday Night Football, “Dandy” Don Merideth said this; if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we’d all have a merry Christmas. I’m certainly not a pessimist, just and optimist with experience. I’d like to eat my words if any positive government action is taken on our behalf. It ain’t gonna happen anytime soon.
Jason wrote “I would absolutely love to see this and I hope that some on the right would come down on the side of civil rights. Unfortunately, not a single candidate in the Republican primary remains (now that Rand Paul is gone) that would nominate such a judge.”
Cruz, it’s still not certain on, given his great statement. Now that Rand is gone, his father Ron Paul is now endorsing Bernie it looks like. Go Bernie! Mike Huckabee is no longer running. He has come out against tough on crime stuff. Even with his soft-on-crime reputation, he still is a hero of the religious right and only until the last debate got moved to the pre-debate from the mainstage debate.
“In her dissent in 2003 in the case that decided that the “Registry isn’t punishment”, Ginsburg states the obvious:
“Furthermore, the Act’s requirements resemble historically common forms of punishment. Its registration and reporting provisions are comparable to conditions of supervised release or parole; its public notification regimen, which permits placement of the registrant’s face on a webpage under the label “Registered Sex Offender,” calls to mind shaming punishments once used to mark an offender as someone to be shunned.”
Please show me a conservative, someone on the right, a Republican, who is willing to go on the record acknowledging this reality that Ginsburg so eloquently stated. Philosophically, I agree 100% that an anti-registry stance is consistent with Libertarian values, but I’d really like to see even a single example in a published case or a piece of major legislation.”
Ginsburg was nominated to the SCOTUS by Centrist Bill Clinton, as was dissenter of 2003 Smith V Doe Justice Stephen Breyer. Ford put in Stevens and Bill Clinton put in Breyer and Ginsburg. None of the 3 2003 Smith v Doe dissenters had their appointments to the SCOTUS made by a leftwinger.
“I really want to believe that this can become an alliance of some sort against this. But over the past 2 decades and currently, the ONLY people in power that have ever taken a stand against this shit have been left wing judges. No politicians, left or right. No major law enforcement agencies. No right wing judges. I’m not making a political statement here, I’m observing the reality of what has happened.”
I do agree, looking at Chris Smith as an example, that there a lot of tough on crime rightwingers hellbent on retribution and are trying to “make an end run” on the Constitution to get their vengeance. But as it’s been pointed out, there are examples to the contrary where judges are not leftwingers but are still free thinkers and apply the Constitution rationally and not work to weasel their way around what the founding fathers meant to say about Cruel and Unusual punishment and Ex-post facto laws.
You know, everyone seems awfully quiet on this issue at present. The quiet before the storm?
I believe the law has been signed, more pain which we knew already.