A group of 134 sex offenders have asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court to revive their lawsuit against the state of Idaho because they say they were denied their constitutional rights when they were forced to register as sex offenders.
The group, referred to only as John Does 1 through 134 in the lawsuit, notified U.S. District Judge David Nye on Sunday that they would ask the appellate panel to review Nye’s ruling dismissing the lawsuit.
The group originally filed the lawsuit in 2016, contending that Idaho laws requiring them to register as sex offenders for life violated their right to due process, subjected them to double jeopardy and amounted to cruel and unusual punishment among other problems.
Some plaintiffs said rules requiring them to stay at least 500 feet from schools prevented them from exercising their religion because their preferred churches were near a school. Others said they were convicted of misdemeanors or lesser sex offenses but years later were forced to register as sex offenders when lawmakers decided to reclassify the crimes as felonies.
Lots of arrows but we’re any on target?
Judge said no.
Property maintenance, plain indenture, to a database.
FREE men are paid to maintain machine properties.
A sound arrow, just take my word for it. Man will never be truely subservient to machine.
So let me get this straight…
The judge says the suit is being dismissed because they didnt specify exact instances of hardships no matter how obvious and unavoidable (like being shot with a gun does nothing to you unless you specify which organs were destroyed). Then, when they ammend and add the specifics he says “oh, my bad, it doesnt matter because other cases that outlined actual damages were dismissed by other courts so I will also.”
What an idiot. This is the problem when a judiciary already knows what it wants it’s decision to be regardless of facts and just needs to find the excuse to rule that way.
I am betting the cases he is referring to, if disected, would not be an apples to apples comparison too. Most times I trace bad caselaw backwards to its source you end up at some original case 100 years ago that was against a business instead of a person and recieved less constitional protection.
If anyone with legal research skills can find what cases this judge is referring to it would be appreciated.
Sure to be watching this case closely. Anyone have citation to the briefs? I would like to see exactly what they are claiming so if the 9th rejects them I can be sure to make different claims and points when I get there.
I really do not like the fact that they are including so many plaintiffs in the case. This leaves to many opps for the judge to deny which will make it that much more difficult for the next guy.
“Others said they were convicted of misdemeanors or lesser sex offenses but years later were forced to register as sex offenders when lawmakers decided to reclassify the crimes as felonies.”
Are you friggin’ kidding me??? Idaho thinks it can take a misdemeanor and just upgrade it to a felony retroactively???? What the hell kind of crap is that???
“…the challenges the Does allege are the same as those raised by sexual offenders … across the country that have already been considered and rejected by the Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court.”
WOW…so, apparently Judge Nye doesn’t consider Colorado or Michigan to be part of the United States then. What planet does this idiot judge live on???