ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 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

ACSOL NewsCalifornia

CA: Los Angeles Superior Court Allows In-Person Registration to Continue


A Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled today that the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department may continue to require in-person registration during the COVID-19 pandemic.  The ruling was made during a telephonic hearing in response to ACOL’s request for a Temporary Restraining Order.

Although the judge noted that infection to COVID-19 is a “significant concern”, she interpreted state law requirements to obtain fingerprints and photos as to require that all registrants, including those at high risk due to age and/or medical condition, must register in person.  She did not address the fact that the Los Angeles Police Department is currently registering individuals by phone only.

“The court’s ruling today shows a complete disregard for the lives of registrants and their families,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.

During oral argument, ACSOL stated that the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (LASD) is not equipped to protect registrants from a potentially fatal exposure to COVID-19.  Therefore, denial of the TRO would be unconscionable and barbaric.

The sheriff’s department attorney stated during oral argument that LASC is “taking measures” to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in its stations. However, the attorney failed to provide any evidence related to those measures.

“The central argument made by the attorney representing the Department of Justice is that it would be difficult for the government to change current registration procedures,” stated Bellucci.  According to that attorney, there are more than 500 law enforcement agencies that register individuals on a period basis.

Despite today’s ruling, a lawsuit filed by ACSOL that challenges in-person registration by the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department continues.  The lawsuit was filed on March 26 and is one of a total of five lawsuits filed in state court regarding the same issue.  The lawsuits were filed against the City of Murrieta on March 23, against the City of San Diego on March 24, against the City of Sacramento on March 25, against the County of Los Angeles on March 26 and against the County of San Diego on March 27.

In addition, ACSOL filed a lawsuit in the California Supreme Court on April 1 against the Attorney General challenging the state form created by the AG which falsely states that in-person registration is required.  The AG’s form is currently being used by all law enforcement agencies during the registration process.

Related Media



We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
    1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
    2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
    3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
    4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
    5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
    6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
    7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
    8. 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.
    9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
    10. Please do not post in all Caps.
    11. 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.
    12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
    13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
    14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
    15. Please do not solicit funds
    16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
    17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
    18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email 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

And this hearing was telephonic, I presume due to the pandemic. Ironic.

Villanueva already got the county emergency ops center taken away from him. He’s safeguarding every bit of responsibility he has lest he find himself the Sheriff of Nada.
Why are LA and OC sheriffs such douche bags?

So, that means that I should go and register in-person at Van Nuys police department? Or it only applies to the Sheriffs department not LAPD?

@ Ruben H.: Los Angeles CITY Police Department currently allows registration by telephone. The SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT is COUNTY of Los Angeles and is is entirely different. It is the sheriff’s department (County) that requires In-person Registration.
I recommend you telephone first and ask your registering agency what they require.

Wow…how contradictory. This ruling was held via telephone due to infection and public safety concerns of spreading a disease. However, law enforcement employees, registrants as well as their families are put in a totally unnecessary, unreasonable and possibly a deadly situation all in the name of public safety due to the way “She” interpreted the law. Hopefully all encountered will stay safe.

I don’t agree with your last sentence.

Registries are idiotic and unacceptable. It is way past time to stop pretending they are sensible.

Wage war on Registry Supporters/Terrorists. I will today.

😠 This is f****** unbelievable!!! 😠
We are free US citizens – just like any other American citizen!!! It is OUTRAGEOUS that we continue to be treated this way at nearly every turn!!! 😡😡😡

Which judge made this ruling?

The judge’s name is Mary Strobel and she was appointed by Gov. Gray Davis.

Governor Low Beam. Still a PITA.

Ah. That explains this silliness. One of the worst governors we’ve ever had would’ve appointed one of the worst judges.

Davis is another federalist lawyer type. In the same vein as James E Doyle (D-WI)
Lawyer turned politician with a bend toward public union support. He, Tom Foley and Nancy P supported China’s free trade advantages from NAFTA which in turn consolidated many votes from the shipping docks and AFSCME folks via Quid pro quo. If nothing else they stick together and appoint judges with the same socialist bend. While is true we’re all in it together- we’re also competing.

I would have thought that Gray Davis appointed judges tend to be more registrant friendly than, say, Deukmejian, Wilson, or Schwarzenegger judges. An example would be People v. Nguyen — which was unanimously decided by two Davis and one Brown appointed justices, in favor of the registrant.

Then when you look at Johnson v. Department of Justice, which overruled People v. Hofsheier, the majority who ruled against the registrant in blatant disregard to stare decisis were appointed by Schwarzenegger (Cantil-Sakauye, Corrigan), Wilson (Chin), and Deukmejian (Elia). The justices, in Johnson, that dissented in favor of the registrant was Goodwin Liu, appointed by Jerry Brown, but also joined by Werdegar — who was appointed by Pete Wilson.

I guess it can go either way. Democrat-appointed judges/justices can be just as registrant unfriendly as Republican-appointed judges/justices — which makes the situation for us registrants (and the advocates/attorneys who fight for us) all the more frustrating.

First, I got angry. But now I’m amused ….. by this additional degree of irony: they don’t give a s*** about their own sheriff’s department officers, staff and families!! Because it would be just as easy for a COVID-19-infected Registrant to contaminate THEM ….. as it would be for a Registrant to become infected due to an in-person registration visit. Contagion flows both ways!!

If I had COVID there is nothing I would want more than to be forced to go to a criminal regime’s offices. I’d enjoy hanging out there all day.

Hope they take it home on their lunch boxes 🙂

@ TnT: 👍🤗 .
(If I get sick, I’ll be sure to update my registration – IN PERSON – with my new hospital room address!)

The entrenched roots of a bad system not letting go. They dig in deep, refusing to allow reason to dictate and instead chose to believe in the image they blindly accepted. The image they sold to the public and to themselves.

oh boy… can this be appealed?

too funny ….I am sorry mr. …cough ..cough that i had the urge to lick my I.D this morning lol 🙂

Dearest Janice:

Good job today…I don’t mean this ironically, but sincerely. You job is hard, and I do not want you personally to be down over today’s ruling. This is the way law goes, you never know…you take a principled, smart and intellectually correct position….and hope that a judge is willing to go out on a limb and do the right thing.

There is no shame in being denied a request for extraordinary relief…I do understand what the judge is doing also…we, meaning you…and we love you for what you do for us, need to just keep beating on this door that eventually will fall down…because it is wrong.

So, a big thank you from me…and have yourself a gentle and good weekend.

Best Wishes, James I

Hear hear!!

Well said, James I!!!!

Thank you, Janice, and team, for everything. We appreciate your efforts. We will lose some battles, but we WILL win this war!

Great post. Agree completely.

Thanks to Janice and all the other good people of ACSOL. None of them are forced to be so good.

Fingerprints and photos can be taken anywhere. I’ve seen police use a fingerprint device to ID people; camera’s are prevalent in society. “The central argument made by the attorney representing the Department of Justice is that it would be difficult for the government to change current registration procedures.” Is their difficulty above our safety?

I will find out how Ga enforces in-person registration in about 3 weeks, especially since my DCS officer and sheriffs officer (compliance checks) have called me on the phone vice in-person visits.

The truly hilarious fact is if a law or policy is to be stopped or enacted local officials, governors, state legislators, Congress, and the court systems in the country, along with the President of the United States and others in the executive branch to some extent all have the ability to order some very significant actions quickly. This isn’t just about registration, but any number of other things like stay at home orders as an example in cities and States. We all know changing something temporarily or permanently can be done fast if the government wants it done. The real reason in this instance and others is simply those in positions to make changes don’t want/need to make them. Eventually the mentality will come back to haunt these people.

We’ll all be wearing masks in public yet the law in many states prohibits face covering in public for safety reasons. The Law supports in person reporting component, yet SCOTUS specifically stated in Alaska v DOE that wasn’t in the record. If it wasn’t in the record in 2003, it sure is here. A federal judge in MICHIGAN ruled the other way barring enforcement. Clearly some things are very wrong in America, registration is but one.

Anyone?? Curious…photos I can understand: appearances change. But supposedly one’s fingerprints don’t ever change, so why do they require that they be taken every time, at each registration??

I don’t understand either except to say cops just like to have a warm body in front of them.

It does seem superfluous to have
1. Your state ID
2. An official record of residence provided
3. Picture taken
4. Fingerprints

Getting one’s fingerprints and pictures done every year at a police station does seem like you’re treated like a criminal. A state ID with your picture on it and an official record should be enough to prove who you are, considering your fingerprint never changes.

Hmmm… I wonder if that’s the reason why it was deemed quasi-criminal back in 1958 under Kelly v Municipal.

Well, this proves exactly what we have known all along. “The central argument made by the attorney representing the Department of Justice is that it would be difficult for the government to change current registration procedures.” Really, and how is it that the rest of the world was able to make necessary adjustments for the time being? People are working from home who never worked from home before (me included). Everything is possible, but I guess their department is incompetent. There is nothing else to it. The only department that is not capable of conducting their jobs when something like this happens. I rest my case.

Very sorry to hear this useless ruling!!!! Janice you a great defender for the people. Never give up or let anything bring you down. One day the tide will turn in your favor and for all the people you our fighting for!!! The judge that ruled this. Don’t care about the people. She is home and in a safe place. So it easy for her to make a deniable ruling. Cause she don’t have to face any offenders and risk getting sick. In my eyes that judge is a coward for not standing up and say we should hold off till this pandemic is over!! But no she a coward and will be in the eyes of all offenders and THEIR families. That judge is putting a lot of people in danger!! I would report her too the bar Association. Please be safe and stay home to all of you. Wash your hands and wear your masks. Vampire out.

The headlines in the next few weeks:

“In today’s news there has been an upsurge of Corona-virus outbreak throughout Los Angeles county affecting multiple officers in various police stations ranging from LAPD to the Sheriff’s Dept.”

“Thanks to Google and Apple analytics we discovered there has been a complete disregard to social distancing protocols practiced by our very own law enforcement.”

“Further investigation reveals that a certain segment of our population has to register in person at these police stations which triggered these new outbreaks despite our scientists’ projection of the curve flattening. What the scientists didn’t take into account in their projections was the stupidity of a single judge that made in-person registration mandatory.”

“This new outbreak will further delay reopening the state thereby costing billions that we don’t have already.”

“The judge cannot be reached for comment at this time…”

“Governor Newsom could be heard muttering something…’that b!+@h judge just cost me my re-election!”

Au contraire…the headlines will somehow spin this to something along the lines of:

“Not only do pedophiles continue to offend against our children, but now they’ve found a way to carry that over to our officials…police everywhere, are dying due to the exposure they’re being faced with by these degenerates”

So why not strike back and demand in-person court decisions?
If it’s good for the goose, it’s good for the gander or some dumb shit.
And while we’re at it demand some covid-19 insurance when we are forced to show up and say…..yep I um……I still live at that address dumbass. So if we are to catch it while in registration mode the county or state will pay for hospital bills for those exposed to it, funeral bills if need be, and a substantial lump sum of money for the registrants immediate family.

Thank you Janice for your dedication and hard work on this matter.

When I go to register I’ll surely go and coughing sneezing and wiping my nose.

This outcome is the microcosm of how retributive the registry is.

Due to the COVID-19, ACSOL was on a phone conference with a Los Angeles Superior Court Judge about LA Sheriff’s Department continued requirement for in-person registration during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Governor had issued a “stay-at-home” order for all of California. Rather than treat registrants like citizens who have earned their freedom, they are still compelled under penalty of law to break the “stay-at-home” order for all Californian to continue to leave the home for an in-person registration. LA County PD is avoiding in-person registration and is using phone registration.

With COVID-19, any surface can have the virus survive up to 3 hours. With in-person registration, registrants usually have to wait in the lobby before being called into a separate room. The registrant will sit in the same seat and table across from the registrant officer. The registrant will also use the same stamp pad. ::: full stop ::: Will each registrant use a brand new stamp pad for the fingerprints? Or will each registrant take home that stamp pad to ensure no one else will *touch* that stamp pad?

Also, the paper the registrant must fill out will be kept together in a file that will be accessed by the clerks and others.

One registrant has died b/c of the COVID-19 because the registrant forgot to register. The judge and DA thought it was too drastic to put the registrant in jail for a “civil” violation, but still put the registrant in jail where the registrant got COVID-19.

I will posit this again. The current laws are systematically treating registrants as second class citizens and we have proof daily. LAPD bypasses in-person registration via phone registration, but LA Sheriff’s Dept requires in-person registration during this deadly pandemic. The potential death of a registrant isn’t valued like a free citizen because free citizens can “stay at home”. Registrants are only monsters and monsters can die without care.

Life for everyone gets suspended in this pandemic, unless you’re a registrant. The registry is supposed to be a scheme to know where a registrant is for any possible lineup. Doing phone registration is valid for one Law Enforcement agency in California, but not for another LE agency in California exposes the level of humanity that is placed upon registrants.

This practice is an example of cruel and unusual punishment. Remember, Jim Crow laws were legal at one point in America. LAPD sees registrants as humans to adhere to the Governor’s “stay-at-home” order, while LA Sheriff’s department sees registrants at monsters to compel free citizens to expose themselves to the pandemic virus because the law says so. No event can alter this in-person reporting if it cannot be altered for a pandemic. Monsters all, despite no longer under custody.

13th amendment: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

From wikipedia… “Involuntary servitude or involuntary slavery is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person’s will to benefit another, under some form of coercion other than the worker’s financial needs.”

From legal-dictionary… “The term involuntary servitude is used in reference to any type of slavery, peonage, or compulsory labor for the satisfaction of debts. Two essential elements of involuntary servitude are involuntariness, which is compulsion to act against one’s will, and servitude, which is some form of labor for another.”

We paid our debt to society already. In-person registration is the involuntariness service under penalty of law. In 2003 Smith v Doe, it was based upon the Alaska registry, which was a mail-in registration. In 1958, California ruled in-person re-registration was quasi-criminal under Kelly v Municipal.

We aren’t humans to LA Sheriff’s department. That is just one of many jurisdictions.

Long post (like mine sometimes!). I only scanned it. Looks good except for the “lineup”part.

The main point of the Registries is so that people who may get near you are warned you might be $EXUALLY dangerous. And to force you to stay away from certain locations.

The “lineup” thing is useless. When a $EX is committed, most of the time the perpetrator is known. Other than that, I’d think that if a Person Forced to Register were to commit a crime, that the Registries would be a perfect reminder to commit the crime far from where he/she was Registered. No lineup is going to work for that.

Registries are dumb. No informed, moral, decent Americans support them.

Maybe the new sheriff in town ought to think about what he said he would do with others in his communities while in office and extend it beyond that to others in his jurisdiction as well:

As for the judge, she knows the law can be upended in a heartbeat if needed, even if only temporarily. She doesn’t seem to be well thought of according to those who judge and rate the judges:

@New Person I can’t resist playing devil’s advocate. To counter the “fingerprint stamp pad not being sanitary” argument, they’ll tell you what they normally tell people who give their prints “there’s the tissue & there’s the alcohol to wipe you’re fingers.” As for sitting in the lobby with others waiting to register? “Make sure you space yourself 3 chairs apart.”

I’m not surprised when I first heard about registering by phone I thought yeah right there’s no way im taking that chance ..
Remember when you do your monthly or annual registration the paperwork says it’s up to you to know the law’s you must follow current or as they might have change.
So it doesn’t matter who’s at fault the responsibility falls on you.
So even if I was told over the phone that i dont need to register in person im gonna need that put in writing with a stamp of the police department who is imposing this then I’d make copies one for my lawyer and one to keep on my person incase I’m stop by LE and there’s some non-compliant issues ..
Its sad and unfair that were not seen as human beings in Society and long as your labeled a sexofender you’ll never be that’s the harsh reality we have to accept
And far as the Sheriff’s Department goes those are the guys who work in the County jails and are responsible for 80% of violent attacks on sexofenders in custody iv seen it first hand they’ll put sexofenders in general population for a week and pretend it was a mistake not only must you watch your back from inmates but from the sheriff’s as well.
So I’m not surprised at all LE will never loosen their grip on sexofenders if anything there gonna tighten it remember people this whole system was designed for us not to function in Society they’ll say and do whatever it takes to get you off the street and back in custody…

Thank you again Janice for all you do for us!!!! Stay healthy!!

Meantime, I guess the judge in this case just wanted to cover her a$$. She did not want to be the one to allow all these “monsters” to roam around unaccounted for – “I’ll let someone else make that decision”. Ah – but this may backfire on her though!!

This is a perfect example of how crazy this registration issue really is!!

Quick question about the AG’s form – does the form attempt to gather more information than is forced by law?

In Georgia, I think that all of the law enforcement criminal agencies try to operate outside of the law. I’ve not seen one yet that is capable of following the law. They ask for truly moronic information that has nothing to do with their lies about public safety. Like a person’s marital status. Or if the person smokes or drinks. Just a bunch of idiocy.

It’s like they can’t help themselves, they just must operate outside of the law. It’s what pathetic, low self-esteem control freaks have to do apparently.

While I completely appreciate the efforts taken by ACSOL to protect former citizens and their families, as well as the police who have to register us, I would never in a million years trust the police department to honor a telephone registration.

Just as I take my chances going to work and the store, I will take my chances with in-person registration. If I catch this, I will not be able to get help, so I will probably infect the police, my family and my coworkers and then I will die. That is just the cycle of life. We die.

My life is not that great anyway and I am surely not going to make any extra effort to protect a police officer so she can continue her great life as I suffer through mine.

If they do not like the idea of catching Chinese Bat Soup Flu from a sex offender, they should have thought about that before they became police officers.

Per instructions [cough, cough, into hands] I’m here to [sneeze into hand] register. [Deep hacking cough into hands]. Here are my [cough towards forms in hand] forms.


Thanks for trying Jance.. We are still behind you
Here is an article

Texas Judge Set To Order State To Allow All Voters To Request Mail-In Ballots

umm No to RC but okay for the general public not to go to a building to do whatever they need to do

The new headline should be “Judge allows L.A. county to spread Covid-19 through Registered Sex Offenders”. Shameful…

@ Jimmy: I posted this under general comments, but it is worth posting here. “Sex offenders” are mentioned once in the piece – but look what the headline reads:

Judge Mary Strobel makes this ruling via teleconference so she can be safe in her home. This shows the total contempt and disregard she has for not only the people ont he registry, but all the law enforcement and their staff that must have a one on one in crowded room to register all the registrants. How disgusting.

We win some, we lose some. This was to be expected-I’m not surprised. Judges in California aren’t taking a chance on being perceived as soft on sex offender laws. They saw the writing on the wall when the Brock Turner judge was ran out of office by public outcry. Maybe judges won’t be as scared when the Turner controversy dies down in a few years, let’s just hope it happens before the next pandemic.

Observing this judge I’m reminded of:
The Peter principle is a concept in management developed by Laurence J. Peter, which observes that people in a hierarchy tend to rise to their “level of incompetence”:

Such a bummer. Perhaps not a surprise, though given the politics of the courts, and maybe given the nature of the legal issue. On a pure issue of statutory interpretation, agencies charged with implementing a statute are entitled to reasonably interpret them. (That might change in the next year or two in U.S. Supreme Court, because it is actually very conservative justices such as Gorsuch and Kavanaugh who have long been against giving un-elected agencies too much power to “interpret” the law.) But for now, addressing the matter strictly from the standpoint of the words and the intent of the statute (PC 290 et seq.), the requirement of photographs and fingerprints does indeed seem to indicate that the intent of the statute was to require in-person registration. Although not necessarily: If the purpose of those is proof of identity, there are alternate (stay at home) means of proving the registrant is truly who he/she says he or she is.
To actually win this case, however, we probably need arguments beyond the narrow scope of statutory construction, since the agency will always have the upper hand over us there. The Eighth Amendment “Cruel and Unusual Punishment” seems to me to be a total non-starter: all lower courts and state courts are required to following the law of the land per SCOTUS that registration is not “punishment” (though we all know it is). And even if we got to SCOTUS on this in about, uh, eight or nine years or so that it would take us to get the case that far, no chance in hell that the present 5 reactionary hacks on the conservative side would reverse the previous ruling that registration is “not” punishment.
Therefore, maybe some other constitutional argument can be made. In California, equal protection is an obvious one, since the LAPD does not require in-person registration, which means registrants elsewhere throughout California, who are similarly situated, are being treated disparately. But as Janice mentioned the phone meeting today, it might be costly as a tactical matter to press that argument because the result might only be for the LAPD to also quit its allowance of phone registration, to make everything “equal”. (Although we might lose that minor battle yet win the overall war, by having a good equal protection argument that the LAPD has already given us.) Or perhaps there is a due process argument. “Liberty” (“no person may be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law) has been very broadly defined for over 100 years under the due process clause (14th Amendment), so a due process argument might be fruitful to consider and research. Covid-19 risks life to in-person registrants, without due process of law.
No matter how we slice it, things are stacked against us, given the nature of this legal issue, the politics of the courts, and the present state of the law. But we all know and appreciate you’re fighting for us, Janice and Chance

Interesting. Just give up? OC posted a notice on their door/directing you to call a young girl on the phone who registered you on phone/yet stated we weren’t really registering and would need to come back? When? How? LB, registers you via phone and you come pick up a receipt after just giving a thumbprint? The virus can live for hours. Medical professionals are still learning about the virus daily and not sure (don’t argue/I won’t share what my spouse does) how it’s being spread. Multiple people are being put on ventilators and dying, yet they have no clue how they where exposed? Life will never be the same. Police will never operate the same/the courts/it’s going to just take a few lawsuits. Are you guys just going to give up?

@USA – No, we are not giving up on this case or on this issue.

Janice, thanks again for your efforts and support.
I hope the general public gets a better feeling through all this additional media coverage what registration really involves and accomplishes. It is of course different for all 50 states. Obvious to us is that it is an exercise in repetition. I wouldn’t think the general public knows that registration is writing out our address, our names, our vehicles, our SS #, Height, weight, drivers licence #, birth date, eye color, aliases, employer, school and emergency contacts. These things do not change often, if at all. Some states do finger printing over and over again. The canned obvious response to the stupidity of the system is “do the crime, do the time”. In our current environment, more people are potentially hurt than just us deserving people. I hope some of this stupidity gets media attention. Maybe a couple of registering agents getting the virus, dying and their estate suing for stupidity compensation. (Glad I can at least E-mail mine in.)

A passport picture for identification to re-enter the country is good for 10 years.
I have not had my pocture taken every yesr at my annual so in person for a picture is not required.
Easier would be to just use my divers license or state id photo. Eve if a new photo was needed annually fedex and the postal service takes pictures that could be mailed to the police.
Finger prints are taken upon arrest and do not change. After my first registration I have not had my finger prints taken. I cannot imagine a situation where finger prints after even for a false arrest would be needed ever again by any law enforcement agency.

I print every year , pitcher every year , same lame paper work every year even know I am at the same whole in the wall , , The one thing I am greatful for is that the Sheriff office treat us like humans being tagged like cattle , rather than just being treated like a cow like at the PD , nice try acsol cant believe that’s where that ends , it don’t surprise me that was LA since that’s where the registration started at in CA , sheriff/ PTA , LA will be the last place fighting to keep this unconstitutional registration in the year 2040

The whole in-person registration scheme is a farce, and we all know it.

Here in Wisconsin we register in person the first time, and then only have to go in person every few years to update our photos. I’m able to update everything else via email, phone, or fax from the comfort of my home. My annual re-do is done by mail. I think that this is the situation for except those that were captured under the Chapter 980 program – our version of civil commitment. I think that the only time I’d have to go in person other than for a new photo is if I move to a new jurisdiction.

Our registration is probably more accurate and up-to-date than many others, and last I looked our compliance rate was quite high.

There is no justifiable reason for frequent in-person registration, and it’s clear that it’s not necessary for accuracy. As evidences by voting by mail, passports by mail, and everything else done in this country by mail there is no reason for this. Showing up at a police station doesn’t prove you live or work where you say, and provides no more information than a phone call or email could.

To me, it’s time to end the in-person registration across the board. It would be a great first step.

Yeah but WI is screwed up royally in a different way: its focus on victims rights says the victim always has the right to know where their abuser lives, so even if you move out of state or out of country or to Mars, they require ongoing annual registration. And that, ladies and gents, is a crock.

Perhaps, but all that’s required to fulfill that is an email.

The new constitutional amendment only furthers what was already done years ago, and I’m not sure how that will play out when it conflicts with federal rights or federal rules.

Even then, it’s somewhat unclear what happens if one moves from Wisconsin permanently. I’ve asked that question specifically from a registration specialist and have received mixed answers.

Even if continued registration is required (as it is in many states), I’ll take sending an email or returning a mailing over sitting in a crowded office for a day once every 90 days.

Go in there acting like you have a cough. Maybe by accident start coughing when you get the finger print business. Doubt they will keep you too long.

I just did my annual 290 registration. I was fortunate enough to have our city (county?) doing it by phone. Took all of about 60 seconds as the person simply verified my name and that none of the information on file has changed. He said he’d then mail out copies of the receipt and all the forms that I’d usually initial, with a note that these weren’t signed due to COVID-19

Why isn’t this just a regular thing? Saves us time and a lot of anxiety. And seems easier for the person on the other end as well. If the actual law doesn’t require in-person registration, then why does pretty much every jurisdiction force it? Seems like this isn’t any different than some places trying to force residential restrictions beyond the state law. Is this one of those things that needs to be sued about like living restrictions but hasn’t been penciled in yet for a law suite as it’s not nearly as devastating as the residential ones (totally get that)? Or is there something deeper?

How many times do we have to hear stuff like this?,

“Although the judge noted that infection to COVID-19 is a “significant concern”

We heard this before where the courts ignore constitutional rights,

In Tandeske, the Court recognized petitioner did “indeed” have “important” “liberty interest” but the Court completely ignored those “liberty interest” and cited Smith, at 123, and Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 727, 117 S. Ct. 2258, 138 L.Ed.2d 772 (1997) as authorities.
“Thus, although the Does possess liberty interests that are indeed important, Smith precludes our granting them relief.”-

Just on a cursory reading, it does appear to me that due process might be a viable ground to assert that registrants should not have to register in person during the covid-19 pandemic. Smith v. Glucksberg dealt with people’s desire to die, not our desire to live, so that case is flatly distinct and should not bar our claim. The Tandeske case, likewise, had nothing to do with registrants’ desire to live, but rather addressed only whether public safety outweighed registrants’ liberty interests. Notably, Tandeske recognized that registrants do indeed have a liberty interest, protected under the Due Process Clause, against registration. The court merely held that public safety could validly override our liberty interest.
Covid-19 presents an altogether different scenario: Here, our health and lives themselves (protected under the Due Process Clause) are risked by having to register in person. This, it seems to me (again, I have not researched the issue thoroughly or analysed it completely), may well be solid ground for our claim.
If so, Janice and Chance might consider dropping (or adding to) the purely statutory claim. Present the constitutional claims we might have, such as due process (and possibly also equal protection, although I understand the tactical risk in that one).

Thanks Janice! I took your advice and I’m processing what you suggested in LA. As you mentioned, the address laws are rather open to interpretation. I’ve filed with someone who does this (this is all they do) and it’s very apparent LA is much more receptive to those who seek to increase their opportunities for rehabilitation. Best wishes

I’m sure those “measures” will consist of thin sheet of plexiglass hung from the ceiling.

Why don’t you guys donate? Or provide suggestions on how this issue can be addressed? It’s wonderful to have a place to rant, but what do you suggest?

This is a pandemic! This story will be shared in history books. Life will never be the same. Social distancing/shields/face masks will be around for some time. Multiple healthcare professionals have noted that many of those affected have underlying health issues (BP/overweight/diabetics, asthma, lung disease/etc). Yet, many police agencies are demanding that those required to register must come in and register with their agencies and processed by those with no idea on how to protect those with these high risk health issues. Furthermore, what new measures will be put in place to protect us? Janice, you need a healthcare professional to instill the fear of God into the Judge and the implications on how their lack of insight can affect the health of others! Police officers are clueless! It would just take one lawsuit to change this! Or, a class action lawsuit!

We hear you, USA! We are busy preparing a new lawsuit challenging in-person registration. This lawsuit will be filed in a federal district court. Therefore, it will be heard by a judge who is appointed for life and does not need to consider re-election unlike the judge who denied our TRO on April 17.


I’m sure there are exceptions (few and far between), but doesn’t it seem that every ruling or opinion favoring registrants come from appointed judges (be it federal or a state supreme court)?

I’m not naive – I know full well that the politics of the moment will swing more discretionary rulings and opinions this week than justice, search for truth, and fairness will in the next 10 years, particularly among elected judges. I’m just trying to figure out how politics plays in federal and state supreme courts. Aspirations of appointment to higher courts or personal advocacy are the only things I can think of for appointed judges to continue to rule in favor of the registry and its associated restrictions despite the obvious unconstitutionality of it all. Am I missing something?

Yeah Michael, it is my opinion that Tandeske is erroneous case doctrine as they present no evidence or explanation as to what liberty interest were at stake and as to what public safety elements were at play. This statement “public safety” is not a legitimate authority to simply dismiss these “liberty interest” on their face like they did. If this was the case than any law can be rationalized and upheld if it has any perceived “public interest or safety” proclamations attached to it by these corrupt politicians. Even though rational basis review is a high bar to hurdle, it does not leave the legislative branch unquestionable authority to harass or disenfranchise individuals or groups and certainly not to bypass due process just on their word.

This is going to get interesting now for sure.This is going to end up drawing a line in the sand as to what point does the danger imposed by at least the in-person reporting requirement become state officials acting in reckless disregard for our safety and not just a consequence of conviction so often proclaimed.
I know some people take offense to this layman law that I throw out there, but the following could be helpful for sure, it is part of my case already.

See Wood v. Ostrander, 879 F.2d 583, 588-90 (9th Cir.1989) (plaintiff could sue government when state officer affirmatively placed her in dangerous situation), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 938, 111 S.Ct. 341, 112 L.Ed.2d 305 (1990); L.W. v. Grubbs, 974 F.2d 119, 121 (9th Cir.1992) (generally citizens may not sue state employees who fail to protect them from harm committed by private parties unless there is a special relationship between the plaintiff or the state places the plaintiff in danger), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 951, 113 S.Ct. 2442, 124 L.Ed.2d 660 (1993); “a government must provide protection if the government is responsible for creating the danger.” DeShaney, 489 U.S. at 200; “If the state puts a man in a position of danger from private persons and then fails to protect him . . . it is as much an active tortfeasor as if it had thrown him into a snake pit.” Bowers v. DeVito 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982); similar to the Ninth Circuit, the Sixth, Seventh, and Eleventh Circuits adopted the “deliberate indifference” or “reckless disregard” standards. See Foy v. City of Berea, 58 F.3d 227 (6th Cir. 1995); Magdziak v. Byrd, 96 F.3d 1045 (7th Cir. 1996); McKinney v. Pate, 20 F.3d 1550 (11th Cir. 1994).
The Ninth Circuit found that the government could be held liable if it could be shown that its officers’ conduct was deliberately indifferent, that it was reckless. Lewis v. Sacramento County, 98 F.3d 434, 441 (9th Cir. 1996). The Supreme Court reversed, holding that in an emergency situation, like a high-speed chase, the government can be held liable only if its officers’ behavior “shocks the conscience.” (emphasis added).
In the non-emergency context, the lower courts have consistently held that deliberate indifference or recklessness is sufficient to show liability if there is a state-created danger.
Similar to the Ninth Circuit, the Sixth, Seventh, and Eleventh Circuits adopted the “deliberate indifference” or “reckless disregard” standards. Foy v. City of Berea, 58 F.3d 227 (6th Cir. 1995); Magdziak v. Byrd, 96 F.3d 1045 (7th Cir. 1996); McKinney v. Pate, 20 F.3d 1550 (11th Cir. 1994).

I like this @miker. I am going to throw an opposite argument out there for the sake of discussion and consideration to maybe help solidify a winning point WRT the line: “a government must provide protection if the government is responsible for creating the danger.”

The Gov’t would argue they didn’t create the danger, but it came from an overseas source not of their choosing; therefore, case should be dismissed.

However, if the danger has been introduced and is present, then they must be able to provide how it was introduced to the environment, e.g. through a private person, employee, etc. If they cannot, then they must defer to the safest measures required to ensure they don’t aid the danger in propagating further because not doing so would or most likely very well could “shock the conscience” of the public and employees when “recklessness” and “deliberate indifference” is happening in not preventing the propagation of the danger.

For example, the gov’t must provide protection in the workplace through PPE and other safety measures even when the danger exists despite not initially creating the danger. OSHA and L&I would say that is needed at a minimum to ensure the safety of all parties when danger is in the workplace or job area.

Therefore, by not temporarily suspending in-person registration actions, or providing other such measures which accomplish the same as in-person does without the danger currently present, they are potentially continuing to aid the propagation of the danger until further notice and actions make it safe to complete this silly action to begin with in-person actions once again.

Great job Janice! Yes, Federal won’t be so bias. Interesting story (any thoughts): I initially registered via telephone in OC. A young girl (sounds like an administrative assistant) took my info and informed me we would be required to come back in May? I also informed her I had a new secondary address? She declined to take it/she informed me to update it when I came in again? I then called LB to schedule an appt and I was informed I hadn’t updated my registration in OC and I might have a warrant? I then called OC back and (crazy) she informed me that I had attempted to register, but really hadn’t? In essence (Janice), OC is refusing to fully register me via the telephone and breaking the law? I had OC call LB! (What if I didn’t own a phone)? I registered via the phone in LB and showed up to initial their form and I gave 2 thumbprints! I was in (mask) and out in 5-10 mins. They didn’t even photograph me/I registered there 2-3 years ago. When I go to OC, it takes no less then 2-3 hours? They photograph you each year and full finger prints every year? Why? Shouldn’t LE (due to this life changing event) streamline the process in order to protect both parties? 2-3 hours each time! Comments? So, OC input via a young girl we attempted to register? How will we know when to return? What if I took the bus/took a day off of work and went down there May 1st? How will anyone know? The virus we be affecting everyone’s lives for at least 1 more year and clearly the protocols, social distancing and numerous other things will change forever! Thoughts? Ideas? The lawsuit is clearly the only option.

In summary, the registration process (LB does a pretty good job/your in and out) should be quick/safe and streamlined. OC is terrible? Who wants to sit 2 plus hours/be finger printed each year (are they cleaning the equipment) and exposed to who knows what? This is disturbing.

Wait. “Difficult for the government to change current registration procedures,” ??

Governor Newsom signed an executive order on April 1 waiving all kinds of laws that protect the public AND healthcare workers until the State of Emergency is lifted . He waived current staffing ratios in hospitals, allowed healthcare personnel to practice without a license, and did away with strict sterile methods required by pharmacists while compounding drugs. And these are just the waivers related to the healthcare field!
Laws can and are waived under certain circumstances. And it is the Governor who needs to do it!

Rules for human beings aren’t the same for monsters. LoL

Again, it’s a systematic open segregation made legal by the SCOTUS on one specific set of people. No other set of convicts share this open harassment.

LA Courts are a mess. Numerous officers/support staff have contracted the virus. I imagine most inmates are on lockdown? Defendants are being arraigned via video conferencing? Can you imagine (I bet this is the time to get a plea agreement) going to trial? How about being a juror? I just filed my COR in LA County and I think it’s going to be interesting. I bet this process will extend past the fall and the processes/procedures will last for some time. Nothing will be the same. As such, the process to register should be streamlined and the location should be done in both a safe/professional setting. I have complete faith in JB’s lawsuit. It will prevail. Turn this negative into a positive!

I am worried because my local PD (Glendora) is refusing to register me at all. Will I be in violation of registration laws because they refused me? Will the Department of Justice simply issue a warrant for my arrest? What am I supposed to do?


Get their declination in writing from them or other way to doc it.

Dear James:

Seeing your post raises the hairs on the back of my neck and makes me winch in remembered pain…

20 years ago my agency advised me to wait a month because genetic testing was going to come in, (turned out to be untrue) and I was violated…it was the worst year of my life…though I beat it, more or less, a diversion and dismissal program…which was still terrible.

I am going to give some hard advice…knowing that none of us like or enjoy interacting with the police…I would go to the Glendora Police department, (I know it is open), and politely see a clerk at the front window and insist that the logs reflect that you came in to register (make sure you see her write it or type it into the system….in fact maybe ask for a dated and timed receipt) or take an actual report (a complaint about their refusal to register you, but be polite) or a report that you came in, sat in the lobby and waited for some officer to come out and speak to you.

I know this is hard love from me…and you must choose your own path…but with a smile and truth and patience being on your side…I think you must force the issue….politely, but create an actual record with the Glendora police dept. of your attempts to register.

And if they even arrest you for being a pest and trying to do the right thing…you’ve got to do it.

In my opinion….ain’t no judge going to burn you for trying to be good. It is Monday, hop to it, (and let us know how it goes)

Good Luck and Best Wishes, Jame I

I have been doing battle with the Glendora Police Department for several years on a variety of issues. The bottom line is the City of Glendora would prefer that no registrants live there. Too bad. James now has legal representation and we will ensure that he is not charged with or convicted of failure to register.

Dear Janice:

You are the Gold Standard in Fine Human Beings…we can all be happy…that you are, just there. Do they give out Nobel’s or some other great prize for being Good? I hope so, you would win hands down.

Best Wishes, James I

Obviously do whatever Janice says to do. when I went out of the country nobody was there too take my 21 day notice.
I had an officer on his business card write the time and date I I was there, he signed it and I handed him my travel plans. That was it I never had an issue with it.
Good luck Janice will take care of you . This is just another piece of the puzzle Janice needs to eventually fight to rid us of this miserable mess.

Shiits about to get real !! 😷

I concur. Santa Ana is a mess? When do we go back? Call? When I called the listed number on the door, I was under the impression I was registering? I attempted (she was clueless) to give her a 2nd address, but she refused? I registered in LB as well, so I have a receipt! How am I suppose to know if I registered or not? Duh.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x