ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (6/12 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule


NV: Ruling Allows Nevada Sex Offender Registration Requirements to take Effect [UPDATED with NV Supreme Court action]

An emergency writ was filed with the Nevada Supreme Court late Thursday in a last-gasp effort to block a new sex offender registry law from taking effect Friday. Full Article

Update July 1, 11 am


CARSON CITY — The Nevada Supreme Court Friday put the brakes on a law that would impose new registration requirements on sex offenders and subject thousands of them to community notification. Full Article

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • 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.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • 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.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please do not solicit funds
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
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.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“Butler said annual sex offender verification procedures took about 3,300 hours of staff time to complete. The more frequent verifications required under the new law will add 8,600 staff hours for an annual total exceeding 11,000.

“We can’t do it with the staff we have today,” Butler said.”

I hope they go bankrupt!
This is serious injustice, and the legislators who enacted this should be ashamed of themselves!

What garbage!

This is such a crock. The judge didn’t even investigate the law enough to know that tier 3 registrants have no way off the registry – ever. What’s the deal? And how exactly is it not ex post facto to require a person to show up every 90 days to what amounts to a booking procedure (including new fingerprinting)? Makes me wonder who’s got their hand in the till for this new ‘rso processing industry’. I don’t know what the answer is, but it’s painfully apparent you are not going to get a just ruling in NV. Well, on the upside, the neighborhoods of 3,000 people are about to see their real estate value take a dive.

My prayers go out to the families affected by this horrible and unconstitutional injustice.

I would think the issue is yet again “ripe” to challenge the Ex-Post Facto violation from Doe Vs Smith now that registering is nothing like it was back then.

It’s also “ripe” to challenge registration for anyone as being unconstitutional.

On the positive side, I hope the absurd nature of this issue raises more negative press for the registry.

Chris F
It is so “Ripe” it’s going rotten. If we don’t do something soon, it will dry up and just blow away. We can’t let that happen. Thank You for your prayers.


Presumably after their attempt to get the Ninth Circuit to rule on their side, they made petition to the Supreme Court. If not by bow, they have lost their chance on this one. If they did, then SCOTUS never took the case. Wish I knew which one it was. If SCOTUS said no, then we are screwed for at least another decade.

I guess my question is will the hearing on July 12, 2016 still have a chance of shutting this new law down?

This turn of events in Nevada ought to serve as a warning to us. I have always questioned the wisdom of pursuing a tiered system on two basis points. One: people who are now successful in dealing with the stigma of being an RSO might suddenly find themselves spotlighted as the worst-of-the-worst by being classified at the top tier. Of courses, the counter argument is that those convicted of lesser crimes will have some relief. But the issue is this: the tiered system will help some and it will hurt some. Alleged winners and definite losers.
Second: This Nevada decision should tell us that there is no security in a tiered system. Today you may be level one, and tomorrow you may become level three. In fact, one should assume that the politicians and courts will do everything in their power (to protect their power and positions) by creating changes in the law to subjugate those tier Ones who are obviously “dangerous” but “gaming the system”.
Some at CARSOL have repeatedly expressed their concerns that our energies should be concentrated on IML directly, rather than pursuing a tiered system. What do you think?

The IML is bad. However, the notifications that they sent earlier was awful. Some have said there has been explanations as to how the notifications are legal. I understand that if they only sent the notice that included the criminal record that they would only be sending facts, although it seems like there could be some 14th amendment issues with singling out one segment of crimes. What I do not see how can be legal is to send the notice that these people are “likely to commit a crime again.” That is speculation totally. If we speculated on a person here in this person and made statements that were totally speculative without proof, that would be libel or slander. It seems like a real stretch to me.

I feel for everyone that will be negatively affected by this unconstitutional law. Just remember,. Life is good,,,If you don’t weaken.

I just seen in the news a last chance to block publication of 5300 sex offenders names in Nevada has passed for now pending constitutional challenges

Just to address a couple comments made above.

The hearing scheduled for July 12th is for the state to respond to the challenges made in the original motion. At the injunction hearing on Thursday the state testified that they did not have adequate time to file a response. The judge gave them until July 8 to file, and scheduled a hearing for the 12th.

As to the comment on the tiered system. The issue is how the tiers are applied which is key. Nevada’s former law tiered individuals on a case by case basis. Thus, there was only a very small percentage classified as a Tier 3. The new law is modeled on Adam Walsh and uses strict offense based tiers which increases the number of Tier 3’s dramatically and allowed no means of appealing, or questioning the tier assigned.

The issue is not in a Tier Level structure as much as in how those tiers are assigned and applied. As they say, the devil is in the details.


Moments ago I received an email from Nevada State Senator Tick Segerblom who informed me of the last minute stay by the Nevada Supreme Court. So it is only temporary.

Mr. Segerblom also informed me that he plans to work on solutions in the legislative session next year which begins in February.


Bravo! Punished for Life

You have proven your self Faithful to your fellow Country Men, Women, & Their loved ones.

Stepping one foot forward & Being Front & Center, Directing our public servants to earn their wages is a example of a strong spirit in you. Let us continue to petition The Eternal Father in Heaven for the spirit of courage to spread among us & humbly request for His Wisdom to stand upon to produce convincing arguments when ever we speak.

As Yehovah Lives, so should we

Re: The July 1 update. I had to read it three times just to be sure I was seeing what I actually thought I was seeing. Unbelievably amazing. I feel such relief for the plaintiffs and prayers go out to the lawyers as they continue to fight this fight.

NV Supreme Court: “we conclude that a temporary stay of enforcement of AB579 is warranted to maintain the status quo while this court considers the petition and supporting documents”

This is probably something that should have happened with the IML Injunction.

Is a temporary stay of enforcement 2 days? 2 months? Is there any way of knowing?

watch i guarantee you that a challenge to the necessity of this law or the arbitrary application and any evidence documenting collateral consequences and no challenge based on the right to reputation or what’s the justification for this law and I could go on and on is brought up. it’s sad but true and it’s going to provide more precedents for our opposition when are people going to wake up and bring forth the real issue…all these laws are unreasonable arbitrary oppressive official actions with absolutely no justification that stem from lies and deception.

I wish this was set up as a new news link as well as updating the previous. I missed it and found the new news on a google news search.

In regards to any tiered system…I still don’t see how a challenge of our rights to due process hasn’t succeeded anywhere yet. It’s clearly a lack of due process for a person to be put on a list where that list can be used to deny housing, jobs, travel, access to parks, etc when that person has not been specifically judged a current threat in a hearing where both sides are allowed to present evidence.

I am a Nevadian I was convicted in California. Going on 15 years ago. I am at this moment I am a Tear II with 55 points, meaning I am only 5 points above the threshold of being a Tear I. After hearing all about the AWA for almost a decade now I think it is going to be much ado about nothing. Even with “Records” getting another half million dollars there is no way they can process that many II’s & III’s my local sheriff’s department certainly can’t handle it. Needless to say I have mixed feeling about this.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x