CA Supreme Court Grants Review of ACSOL’s Successful Prop. 57 Lawsuit


The California Supreme Court today granted review of ACSOL’s successful lawsuit in both the trial and appellate courts which challenged regulations issued by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) that, in effected, prohibit anyone convicted of a sex offense from receiving the benefits of Prop. 57.  In today’s decision to grant review, the Court stated that the submission of additional briefings in the case is “deferred pending further order of the court.”

Including today’s decision, the California Supreme Court has granted review of four cases which challenge CDCR’s Prop. 57 regulations.  The lead Prop. 57 case is In re Gadlin (S254599), which has been fully briefed to the Court.  The total number of briefs submitted in the Gadlin case include briefs submitted by ACSOL as well as a group of 19 social science and law scholars.  The Court has not yet scheduled oral arguments in the Gadlin case and is not expected to make a decision in that case without oral arguments.

“Thousands of registrants continue to be denied the benefits of Prop. 57 due to repeated appeals submitted by CDCR,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “We hope that the Court will soon decide the ultimate fate of CDCR’s regulations.”


Related posts

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.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

That’s great! Congratulations!

Too bad all this effort might be fruitless come this November. Amazing how they keep changing the rules and moving the goal post when they realize they made a “mistake”.

While I applaud the continued actions taken by ACSOL in regards to so many different abuses by state government, I have to admit I have tunnel vision. I simply don’t care about anyone’s issues but mine as it relates to the registry. I can’t get excited about early paroles, or lifting housing restrictions. All I think about everyday is any action that affects how long I must be on this horrible list. Coming here often puts me in such a depressed state that I end up cancelling appointments and lying on the couch the rest of the day. I know my dream of good news will likely never happen, and that is why today I left my single apartment and answered an ad for a roommate. I figure I have two months before I have to change my registry address, in that time my dog will take on a fondness for my new roommate. I think it is the only reason I haven’t offed myself. But now I know she will be taken care of, and it doesn’t seem so bad now.

It’s an exercise in mental strength. This problem is going to be with you everywhere you go and in everything you do, it’s your job to endure and stay in the game. Don’t go over the edge.

Everyone in this is fighting to see change. There are wins and losses. But one thing you have in your favor is that the losses are caused by irrational people, the officials just chosing to accept the system because they’re lazy or won’t risk their careers or are predatory (and prejudiced). Which makes them wrong by default.

To do what’s right is an exercise in mental strength and endurance. It means giving up a lot including the life you had before. It’s the hard path. You’re already there, now you just have to keep with it and join the resistance.

I remember watching a historical documentary about the Nuremberg trails. The U.S. Judge made a speech about the treatment of the Jewish population and how the marking of their documents was a akin to a scarlet letter. (Paraphrasing).
While Germany still remembers this tragedy, it seems the U.S. hasn’t. Mainly because it wasn’t part of our history. The people making these laws never experienced this, but we have. I feel this should be included in any argument given for not only IML, but for the domestic registry as well. By including it, are we not honoring the memory of those that died because of that “J” they wore. as many of us have since the registry began.