Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of December 2018. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil.
Related posts
-
Senators call for audit of TSA’s facial recognition tech as use expands in airports | The Record from Recorded Future News
Source: therecord.media 11/22/24 A bipartisan group of 12 senators on Wednesday sent the Department of Homeland... -
-
SORNA Case Advances in Federal Court; PLF Files Motion for Summary Judgment
The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) filed a motion for summary judgment on November 18 in its...
The petition for certiorari in 18-39 BOYD, JASON L. V. WASHINGTON was denied today. The Supreme Court declined to weigh in on “Whether the requirement of frequent, in-person reporting renders an offender-registration law punitive, such that applying the law retroactively violates the ex post facto clause.”
Bummer.
While reading a judge’s opinion, I found reference to a case that seems to be quite useful if/when one challenges Internet/email reporting requirements, either at the State or Federal (34 US Code §20917) level.
I have yet to read the full case, but here’s the snippet:
*****
See Am. Booksellers v. Webb, 919 F.2d 1493, 1499–500 (11th Cir. 1990) (First Amendment protects against both “direct and indirect burdens on speech”).
*****
I’ve long held that the Internet ID and email collection was unconstitutional, but feared the government would do finger pointing and say they aren’t the one doing anything. Well this case says that doesn’t matter! Any level of involvement is a burden…and since it involves the First Amendment, it automatically merits heightened scrutiny (i.e burden is on Government to justify things). The only weakness is it isn’t a SCOTUS ruling, just the 11th.
I’m in Texas and my trial was in 1994. I got differed adjudication that I was told would only require 10 year of probation. Of course we all know how that worked out. I have to register for life now. I was thinking of trying to file some sort of suit. I have seen people on here recommend just copying and filing something myself. Is that still a recommended thing, or should I get a lawyer? Any recommendations of a line of attack?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/ex-frat-president-at-baylor-gets-no-jail-time-in-rape-case-as-judge-accepts-plea-deal/ar-BBQMln8?li=BBnb7Kz
Perhaps if the consequences of being a registered sex offender for life weren’t mandatory then someone that commits a sex crime wouldn’t have to fight so hard to blame the victim and would take a more appropriate deal.
This is a great ruling for all Americans and especially registrants!
Judge rules Americans can secretly record public officials in victory for Project Veritas
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/10/project-veritas-case-judge-patti-b-staris-rules-am/
Registrants have a lot of interfacing with LE and public officials and this is legal precedent to record them in action, e.g. compliance checks, traffic stops, walking about your home, council meetings, etc where they are in their official capacities. I wonder who will be the first one to record their registration action with them in the office. There are cellphone apps that will secretly record any action without their knowledge and allow you to protect yourself.
Thanks Chris f. I actually did speak with Richard Gladden on the phone in 2016. He didn’t seem very interested in the conversation and told me I should move to a better state if I wanted to stand a chance of getting out of registration. Not sure if his opinion has changed since then. Part of my issue is that this is keeping me from growing my business abroad. There is a good chance that I will not be able to get a Visa where I need to be to establish an office. There are so many ways that these new laws imposed ex-post-facto on me has damaged me, my family and my livelihood I feel like giving up sometimes. I’m getting older now, and I really need to push my family business across the goal line so it can provide for my children families too, but the USA changing deals on me like they did the Native Americans really ought to be something we could go after them for. I would love to file a suit for about 150K for every year they have screwed me over. That would be justice.
TS, do not try that in CA, CA is a two party consent state, so you have to have the other person permission. At least for things like telephone, IDK about in person, I mean we have people every day recording people in public places so I am sure that could be a strong argument.
“California lawmaker [Joaquin Arambula] arrested on child cruelty suspicion”
“The arrest came after officials at an elementary school discovered an injury on a child and the child told them who caused it.” Oh, this is too good! One of our enemies in the California Statehouse is a genuine child-abuser. He will not, however, ever be put on a Registry since there is no Registry for simply beating your children. The disparity in how physical and emotional abuse and neglect are treated in contrast to how sexual abuse is treated is breathtaking. “Officers were “confident that a crime had occurred” and arrested Arambula on suspicion of willful cruelty to a child, Dyer said. He was taken in a patrol car to police headquarter, finger-printed, photographed and then released because his crime is a misdemeanor. The injury did not rise to the level of a felony.” Let that sink in. You can beat your child and not have it be treated as a felony. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/california-lawmaker-arrested-child-cruelty-suspicion-n946916
The 6th circuit just released a bad opinion (Doe vs. DeWine) reversing the lower court ruling regarding procedure due process claim on so registration. Citing scotus’ connecticut dps (2002) case, the 6th shot down the registration challenge. I dont know what the hell is going on with that attorney still claiming the “procedure” challenge! A lost cause for sure…😡 http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0265p-06.pdf
SCOTUS just accepted Kisor v Wilkie where the court may overturn two of their own decisions. Very interesting…
@AJ – I wonder how Justice Kagan will feel about that possibility? 🤔 Stare Decisis anyone? 🤣
Wel,l it looks as though we might have a judiciary again. It is called Kisor v Wilkie and SCOTUS accepted the case. This will significantly roll back executive branch power and force courts to do their own job and stop deferring to the legislature for everything under the sun. Although this is a case about interpretation of a statute, I can see it having far reaching repercussions and reign in big nanny gov. on many levels. IDK, AJ you are the wizard at interpretation of many of these cases, what is your take on this? I think it could be used in many ways in our favor as it is not just about interpretation but it is about limiting deferment to the legislative branch in the court so rules. The question is whether the court should over rule Auer v Robbins, Bowles v Seminole Rock and Sand Co. and the Chevron deference.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/the-boring-supreme-court-case-that-could-help-make-america-great-again/
For anyone concerned about The Farm Bill and Snap
(37) Disqualification of certain convicted felons
The House bill amends section 6 of the FNA to disqualify certain convicted felons
from participating in SNAP. (Section 4039)
The Senate amendment contains no comparable provision.
The Conference substitute deletes the House provision.
https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20181210/CRPT-115hrpt1072.pdf
For anyone in Texas or the 8 other states where the states constitution forbids any retroactive legislation, there are tons of good arguments and quotes to get from this Texas case:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16340650084678413911&q=Robinson+v.+Crown+Cork+%26+Seal+Co.,+Inc.,+335+S.W.3d+12&hl=en&as_sdt=6,44&as_vis=1
It appears all of the retroactive parts of the Texas Chapter 62 sex offender regulations as well as the retroactive addition to the registry or increase of time on the registry have a good case to challenge it.
The judges on that case made it clear that you cant just stick retroactive stuff, particularly on a hated and poltically powerless group, without proven legislative fact finding to support its need and an overwelming need to do it to protect the public. It cant just be based on good intentions.
One thing I am curious about is other peoples opinions on how our judiciary, and particularly Scotus, divides our constitution into each little part and doesn’t take it as a whole or at least combine related portions. The founding fathers certainly didnt intend on breaking it up when the made broad statements about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
For example, even in cases challenging due process, if you don’t specify and argue on both procedural and substantive, then they refuse to consider them. I believe they are linked and always relevant to greater degrees depending on the issue. Another is bill of attainder and separation of powers. Many arguments to other constitutional infractions contain an element of those.
Just once I would like to see a judge rule on something being unconstitional not because of a black and white violation of one particular sentence of the Constitution and instead weigh multiple parts of the Constitution and the constitution as a whole in how a person’s liberties are unfairly trampled on.
“Judge resigns after removal from sex offender cases” Love it! “But twice in the last month the state Superior Court removed McDaniel from sex offenders’ sentencing proceedings for allegedly showing bias against the defendants and their attorneys.” This has to be some kind of first. A modest celebration is in order. I would say to curb your enthusiasm except that I think that this isn’t a one-off but part of an emerging trend. https://wjactv.com/news/local/judge-resigns-after-removal-from-sex-offender-cases
“ACLU condemns Nevada school policy for background checks” This is some great pushback against Reno schools that is taking the criminal background check to a new and more abusive level and makes a big point about parental rights to participate in their child’s education and life. “Civil rights leaders in Nevada are condemning a new school district policy requiring background checks for parents visiting their children’s Reno-area schools, warning the practice could have a chilling effect on immigrant families.
The Washoe County School Board approved the policy in November requiring all school visitors to present a driver’s license or other government-issued photo identification card. School officials said in announcing the policy last month that the ID card will be used to conduct an immediate background report to check for sex offenders, warrants and people on the FBI terrorist list.”
“The American Civil Liberties Union and a half dozen other groups objected Monday in a letter to the school district.
Parents should feel comfortable participating in their children’s education “without fear of being caught up in a law enforcement dragnet,” said Tod Story, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada.
All Nevadans, “even parents who are undocumented or have been involved in the criminal justice system,” have a right to raise their children in public schools, he wrote. “Such a policy can only alienate vulnerable families and lead to distrust of the public school system.”
A federal judge in Texas has ruled the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional, finding that the law cannot stand now that Congress has rolled back the mandate that everyone carry health insurance or pay a fine.
So can this hold water on RSO legislation in the future?
Man this is about the most powerful statement from CASOMB I have found, from 2016 even
“Research recently conducted in California by one of the most highly respected researchers in the world has found that the recidivism rates for sex offenders who have been identified by SARATSO risk assessment instruments (cf. http://www.SARATSO.org ) as “Low to Medium risk” fall in the range of 1 to 2 percent.” [p. 2].
I don’t have any idea what SORNA cost the Government to implement, I don’t think anyone really knows, but if Trump is looking for money for his border wall, end this unconstitutional hit list and use all that money towards funding it!
Risked his neck out and lost his title.
https://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2018/12/13/impd-major-demoted-after-writing-unusual-letter-defending-convicted-rapist/2298921002/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=indystar/allnews
Was just reading through an old thread about NY getting everyone on the registry banned from online gaming.
One of the people was basically predicint how we are getting treated like Holocaust Jews and that if our rights are taken they will be the first of many 😂😂
https://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.363346-MS-Apple-Blizzard-EA-WB-and-Disney-ban-all-NY-sex-offenders?page=1
B. Wat. We absolutely do know what it cost. At least between 10-40 billion.
1. CASOMB Educational Pamphlet WHAT YOU MAY NOT KNOW About CALIFORNIA’s SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY Other Hard Facts, Data, and Visuals; “Criminal offenders with no prior sex offense history are rearrested for a subsequent sex crime more often than low risk convicted sex offenders. Expenditures of registry programs include: [] local law enforcement efforts to register offenders including paperwork and computer entry of records [] compliance efforts to verify residence addresses of registrants [] prosecution for registration violations [] technological improvements to build and maintain online registries [] updating and connecting registry systems with other databases[] When quantifiable costs are summed, they are estimated to range from $10 billion to $40 billion nationally per year. These costs could be reduced if the registry did not try to track everyone for life.” [p. 12]. http://casomb.org/pdf/CASOMB_Education_Pamphlet.pdf [visited December 8, 2018].
Also, how does this sound for short and sweet,
“Plaintiff is part of a sub-class of statistically low risk offenders that are politically powerless to effect changes in law through the political processes and is under represented in the political spectrum. There is no alternative for relief besides through the judicial processes and a decision favorable to Plaintiff in this case.”
My wife wants to book a cruise to the Caribbean with Norwegian Cruise Lines. I have seen the same articles on Google saying that Norwegian is known to allow sex offenders to board the ship. I called a few minutes ago and asked if I could go. The man said “No. You will have to go through customs and border control before boarding the ship and you will be denied entry to the ship.”
Has anyone else had any luck going on a cruise recently?
Looking for some advice on how to file Pro Se motions in federal court (mike r?)
I’m on federal supervised release and am looking to file a motion for early termination of supervised release early next year. Will have completed 6 out of 7 years.
I’ve been writing the motion up for a few months now, but am not sure what the process is for actually filing it with the court. Any input would be appreciated.
@ Junior, yes you write up the motion with proper everything which I am sure you have done from what it sounds like, get a forma paupers if you cannot afford the fees about $00 from what I have heard, and get a cover sheet usually off of the courts website, that is where mine came from, and file all those with your motion. The court will send you an order for what needs to happen. You will have to take like four copies of the motion and what the court sends you including the summons, to each individual you are suing, and I think I had to give the court four copies as well, you will do this thru the marshals office if you are in forma, (IDK if not have a server serve it) who will serve this on the opposing parties, and away you go. The motion that you are asking about is definitely something that just about anyone can handle. Just lay it out, I am not sure why you are going to court though. Have you exhausted all of your administrative procedures thru parole, 602s hearings and more hearings? Is there something in the codes stating you have to petition the court?