Lawsuits target California cities for residential restrictions on sex offenders

The City of Fullerton will consider repealing residency restrictions on sex offenders at its Tuesday City Council meeting.

The city currently prohibits registered sex offenders from residing within 2,000 ft. of any school, park or day care center. But a 2015 California Supreme Court decision struck down similar restrictions in San Diego County, and the decision has been widely interpreted as a rollback of statewide residency restrictions established by voters in 2006 through Proposition 83, known as Jessica’s Law. Full Article

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. 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.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. 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.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. 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.
  23. 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.  
 

10 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“j”, if you are referring to State Senator Sharon Runner, she died in July of 2016. Of course, the evil she did, lives on in infamy.

People of California which is it? Do you really wish to shine a light on us, to know who we really are and where we really live, or do you want us in the shadows, faceless, undetectable, mythical? You made a law so you can locate the “known” bad people and expose that roving sex offender phantom that has been haunting your waking dream. Well that was a little disappointing, was’t it, it didn’t do a thing to make you feel safe. Did it? Now you want to banish those same marked people out of sight and mind. Then you can finally feel safe — for a minute or two. There is an epidemic of cognitive dissonance in this state and country.

These are very hateful laws. It’s almost surreal to think that someone who has committed a crime, been brought to justice, served their time and fulfilled their requirements for parole or probation would be banned from living in parts of the city? This is like something out of a movie. It also is very hateful and basically discounts the fact that they have already been punished? It doesn’t say a lot about the judicial system. So, if your a released murderer, drug dealer, vehicular manslaughter killer, wife beater, drive by shooter, gang member or repeatedly drive drunk, you have more rights and you can get on with your life. A misdemeanor sex offense with summary probation /expunged is treated worst them a murderer? Just terrible

“According to the Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws, at least 50 California cities still have residency restrictions for sex offenders on the books.”

is there anyway we can get a list of these cities??? and do any of these cities have presence restrictions??? I believe both of these issues are very important to most of us…how do they expect us to comply with laws if we don’t even know what they are?? the difference between these laws and all other laws is that all other laws are like firearms laws or drug laws and so on are universal laws that any ordinary person can delineate and comply very easily by just not possessing a gun or drugs where sex offender laws are unclear and interpreted and defined very differently in thousands of cities across the country…the problem is that these laws create criminal sanctions and liabilities not for engaging in any type of criminal conduct but simply for engaging in a wide variety of what is otherwise universally perfectly and obviously legal and I can be chatged and convicted of a serious felony without having any criminal intent to commit a crime. it has been along standing tradition in the criminal justice system in this country that as a prerequisite to any type of criminal conduct was and is associated with the person having criminal intent to commit a crime in order for them to be held criminally liable…

Is there a list somewhere of the 50 California cities that still have residence restrictions? Can ACSOL make this available somewhere on the website?

Excellent news! Glad to see that the cities are finally understanding the reality. I greatly appreciate Janice for putting the facts in front of these towns. These are people with generally good intentions, but they don’t have the education of the facts, and that is the most powerful tool in bringing these lawsuits for the purpose of greatly curbing the out of control laws.