ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: April 18 – Phone, May 16 – Phone,
Oct 10 and 11 – Conference (Los Angeles),  June 13 – Sacramento details

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

2020 ACSOL Conference – Ticket Sales Halted

National

MN: Minnesota sex offenders sue over residency restrictions in Apple Valley

[startribune.com – 2/13/20]

A group of convicted sex offenders has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a far-reaching ordinance in Apple Valley that severely restricts where they can live, alleging that the ordinance effectively bars them from living anywhere in the city.

In a federal class action lawsuit filed Wednesday, three sex offenders seek an injunction preventing the city of Apple Valley from enforcing the ordinance, which prohibits people convicted of certain sex offenses from living within 1,500 feet of schools, parks, playgrounds, churches and child care centers. The ordinance is so extensive that more than 90% of the residential properties within the city’s boundaries are off-limits to offenders, the lawsuit states.

In recent years, cities and counties across Minnesota have passed sex-offender residency restrictions, in part due to concerns that the state is running out of places to house offenders. More than 80 localities across Minnesota, from Inver Grove Heights to Cloquet, have adopted such ordinances — effectively making large swaths of the state off-limits to offenders who have already served their prison terms.

Yet such ordinances have come under increased scrutiny from the courts and attorneys representing sex offenders, who argue that the measures violate civil rights and also impede efforts by the state to integrate offenders back into society. “The restrictions the ordinance impose are so severe that they effectively ban individuals subject to the ordinance’s restrictions from residing anywhere in Apple Valley,” the offenders state in the lawsuit.

Read the full article

 

Join the discussion

  1. Jm from wi

    Go Adele. Great to bring the fight to the midwest.

  2. David

    Ditto: Go Adele!! I wish you all the success with these restrictions that Janice has enjoyed in California! Knock ’em down like dominos!!

  3. Clarence

    I don’t mean to sound like a jerk but its worth repeating. If you are a registered sex offender, do your research before you buy a condo or rent an apartment in a new community you want to live in. If that man simply knew the ordinance in Apple Valley, he could have avoided the hassle by buying a condo in a nearby town without an ordinance. Now this man has to both sale his condo AND find a temporary town to live that accepts registered sex offenders because the polees in Apple Valley aint goin wait for you sell your condo because they want your ass out now.

    • M C

      Having to research whether you are going to have an ex post facto punishment by being denied the right to live somewhere is in and of itself an ex post facto punishment because it requires a significant time expenditure that shouldn’t be necessary. Also, if people didn’t move there to challenge the ordinance then they would lack standing to challenge it so it’s actually a good thing rather than a bad thing to move where there can be an ex post facto challenge made.

      • Clarence

        If you had read the article, those folks moved to that town AFTER the ordinance was passed. If the home and condo owner already lived there before the ordinance, they would have gotten ex post facto protection. Sometimes renters get it but other times they dont get the protection depending on the town that passed the law. So sometimes with renters Yah gotta leave too

        • M C

          @Clarence, perhaps you don’t understand ex post facto and constitutionality as it applies to a committed crime. You cant create a law after a crime was committed to punish someone for it or add new penalties to the crime after it was committed. Since the crime was the sex offense and not moving to Apple Valley, the ex post facto is Apple Valley having the law apply to offenders who committed the sex offense before the new law was passed. It doesn’t matter if they knew they were not allowed to move there. Simply saying they can’t move there is ex post facto punishment unless it only applies to people who offend after it was passed.

    • Will Allen

      You don’t sound like a jerk. Nothing wrong with giving advice.

      Couple of minor details though:

      1. It isn’t acceptable that anyone has to check where they supposedly can or cannot live.

      2. This guy surely does not have to sell the condo and if I were him, I’d keep it. I own a lot of real estate in large part precisely because of nonsense like this.

      3. If this were me, the biggest inconvenience and issue would be that I’d have to do something extremely serious to retaliate against Apple Valley. That can take a LOT of work and effort. Much more than simply finding new housing or moving.

      If there is a God, this Apply Valley dump will burn to the ground.

      Message to Registry Supporters/Terrorists: Sic semper tyrannis. Here’s a famous quote for you – “You think you can be ruthless? Let’s see how you like it when the fighting is brought to you.”

      • Terrald

        I agree in the ideal world we should’nt be told shet by these clowns but I dont want to own something I can’t live in. You’re just giving away your hard earned property tax money to these fascist hick towns.

        • Will Allen

          Why not own 1,000 properties that you can’t live in? That is a lot better than someone else owning them, especially fascists. Then you have a lot of control over people. You can charge them outrageous prices just to live in their own town.

          The best way to lower the quality of life of Registry Supporters is to wage economic war on them. It is satisfying, fun, and profitable as well.

Leave a Reply to Terrald Cancel reply

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 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.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.