As we approach the end of April 2021, we are waiting for the “other shoe” to drop. In fact, we are waiting for two shoes to drop.
The larger shoe comes in the form of SORNA regulations proposed by the federal government nine months ago. The regulations, if finalized, would result in great uncertainty for more than 950,000 registrants and their families.
That is because the regulations would require registrants to meet new federal requirements, such as the disclosure of all internet identifiers and foreign passports. The regulations would also require registrants to attempt to register with local law enforcement up to four times a year in states that are likely to refuse to do so.
The federal government issued its proposed regulations in August 2020 and has remained silent about its regulations since that time. They have not acknowledged the fact that they received more than 700 public comments, including a 36-page comment from ACSOL, regarding the proposed regulations. And they have not indicated whether they will modify the proposed regulations based upon the comments they received. Nor have they indicated whether they will finalize the originally published regulations and if so, at what time.
During a few discussions with federal government officials, it has been implied that the proposed federal regulations are likely to be finalized. Those implications, however, do not constitute an official opinion and therefore we continue to wait for a final decision. In the meantime, the group of legal professionals who created ACSOL’s 36-page comment are preparing for the worse – finalization of the original version of the proposed regulations.
The smaller shoe comes in the form of the Tiered Registry Law in California. Although this law was passed more than three years ago, the state government has not yet issued the form that will be necessary to file in order for an individual to petition for removal from the registry. With only 60 days left before petitions can begin to be filed, registrants and attorneys remain in the dark regarding what information will be required in order to prepare and file a petition.
What is taking the state government so long? Could it be that the state government doesn’t care that many individuals in California who have registered for 40 years or longer will be eligible to petition for removal in two months?
It is imperative that the Tiered Registry petition forms be released immediately so that ACSOL, registrants and private attorneys can begin to prepare and file petitions on behalf of registrants. The state government has had more than three years to create the petition form and there is no excuse for further delay.
If you would like to be notified when either or both of these shoes drop, please provide ACSOL with your email address in the special Tiered Registry and SORNA signup form (it will soon be available below the Email Alerts signup form). ACSOL will report those events as soon as that information is available.
Related links:
Federal Government Publishes Proposed Changes to SORNA
If these new laws are enacted, democracy is dead in the U.S. We can forget whatever progress we have made in regards to the registry. This will empower cities and states to make harsher laws and the DOJ will be on their side if any lawsuits are brought. There will be 1 million ( and increasing rapidly ) citizens that will no longer be able to claim that title, because citizens have rights, and evidently we have none. And if we are no longer considered worthy of these rights, then I see no other alternative than to find a country that does.
One of the two shoes has dropped. The Judicial Council has revealed that petition forms for the Tiered Registry law will not be available until July 1. This will make it very difficult for those whose birthdays are in the month of July to be ready to file their petitions in that month.
This federal law is enacted and I predict a sharp rise in registry related suicides.
Register 4 times a year?
But the Attorney General says that incorporating the new SORNA guidelines won’t cost the States an additional dime😜.
[The Department of Justice expects that the proposed rule will not entail new costs and will result in a number of benefits.For registration jurisdictions, there are no new costs because their requirements under SORNA continue to be those articulated in the previously issued SORNA guidelines. Likewise, for sex offenders, the requirements articulated in the rule either appear expressly in SORNA or have previously been articulated by the Attorney General in the SORNA guidelines. The procedures by which sex offenders register will continue to depend on the registration processes of the jurisdictions that register them, which will not be made more time-consuming or expensive or otherwise changed by this rule.]
And this….
[This PROPOSAL complements the directions to registration jurisdictions in the SORNA Guidelines about integrating previously excluded sex offenders and previously omitted SORNA requirements into their registration programs, with suitable timeframes and procedures, as the jurisdictions progress with SORNA implementation.]
A “ proposal” doesn’t sound like a mandate .
I’m hoping California will refuse their the Feds “ proposal”. I don’t think the Federal Government can force the States to adopt laws that violate the States Constitutions.
Is it a shoe or is it a boot?
Obviously we can never refer to sex offenders without mentioning the registry database(s) and otherwise political use of the database driven infrastructure. That inalienable connection cannot be laid upon the doings of the offender as they did not make law.
What drops is crap rolling downhill from leadership too heavily invested in the advantages wrought via the misuse of our electronic infrastructure, by two political parties perpetually interested in the tactical advantage over the other among the populace.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/in-the-news/ca-pressured-big-tech/
It appears our “friends” in the Ca. Dept. of Justice are determined to undermine the new law allowing us to petition off the registry by changing everyone to a higher tier. Level 2 for over 22 years, now all of sudden guess what? “Your’e tier 3!” And hearing from a friend in similar straits, he was level 1 now he is level 2. But get this: the country where he registers CONGRATULATED HIM on being tier 2. Why? Because, “Since the first of the year, over 90% of the people I have seen are being designated tier 3”. That is coming from the officer who processes the registrants.
18 U.S. CODE 242,,,,,”Continual” I might add,,,Deprivation of rights under the color of Law! plain and simple.IMO
Here is another thing that I find absolutely mind boggling, here we are 3 years and 4 months later and they are still issuing Tier Assignment Letters with the status as TBD (I got one today). They have had all this time and they can’t figure out what tier to put people in? One thing that I am very curious about is what are they going to do with all the TBD’s when the law changes on January 1st and a lot more people are subject to being listed on the public website, who are not currently on the public website. Your tier assignment is what will dictate if you are listed on the public site as of January 1st, so if your tier assignment is TBD, then what? I’m sure that a lot of you are in the same bot as me, not currently displaying on the public website, issued a TBD letter and have no idea what tier they will assign, and wondering if we will remain off the public website?
I think this case is a good primer for what we will be fighting.
https://mitchellhamline.edu/sex-offense-litigation-policy/wp-content/uploads/sites/61/2020/01/District-Court-Memorandum-Opinion-2021.pdf
Here the Court rejected (2nd Circuit) the issue of if the individual mandate constitutes a violation of the anti-commandeering doctrine in the Tenth Amendment.
These men sued because PA is making them register under the “new and improved” registry law (amended after Muniz(2017), looks like Michigan took a page from the PA playbook). The men stated that their pre-SORNA convictions (early 90’s) make them exempt.
However, the Federal District Court reasons that a state requirement, or lack there of, doesn’t matter. They still have a requirement to register under federal law; thus, they can’t enjoin the state from making them register by citing federal constitutional claims. The Court does admit that they (as state offenders) can’t be prosecuted federally unless they travel in interstate commerce, but that lack of prosecutorial power doesn’t relieve the “civil duty” under SORNA to register as required by federal law.
This is the way they will wordsmith around the arguments to say the state’s sovereign doesn’t matter and you will do as the feds say.
De fund the registry………lol
OK,, Have it Your way,,,,!!;-))
The “Reduction” section of Bill Barr’s proposed rule changes is such a cruel joke. 5 years off if you’re Tier 1, which is nearly no one. Tier 2 or 3? No chance. Zero incentive for “good behavior” because we aren’t actually in prison and costing them money. This is a major problem with the registry—since we are not in prison and costing the state a ton of money, they have zero incentive to reduce the durations of registration. Without any incentive not to, we clearly see that the state employs the harshest penalties possible. Is there any way to incentivize smaller registries?
Surprised when I contacted the CA DOJ and learned that I was a tier 3. They could give no reason, and local LE was as surprised as I was.
Can I petition the local court for a change in tier, to tier 1? After 17 years Im losing hope.
I was convicted in 1992 US federal court SF, one count of sexual abuse of a minor, my stepdaughter. Sentenced in a plea agreement to 15 months prison, $100 court fine and three years of supervised released, all of which fully completed. Finished my prison sentence in Aug of 1992. In April of 1993 I was informed, because I was a California resident, I needed to enroll on the state sex offender registry. At the time, US courts had no requirement for me to register, supposedly only the state. CA stated it would be a life time requirement. Questions and calls to the US pubic defenders office for guidance or answers were replied with ‘you have to appeal your sentence’ or to be disconnected. I’m 63 years old and want to buy a home and live my life out in peace with my wife of 40 years, but I’m certain my registration status will come into play and will be denied. I’ve lived in the same apartment for the past 26 years and know it will be hard to find a new place to rent should I decide to move. As the years go by, the requirements to remain compliant just add on. My ‘to be determined’ status for tier classification will probably come back as tier 3, and then the real drama begins with quarterly registrations and possibly no chance to appeal. In 20 or 30 years from now, our situation will either be worse because the citizens of this country continued to turn away from this injustice we live with, or, all these punitive and vindictive requirements will have been banished because Americans finally realize an injustice to any is an injustice to all. That is still to come. For now, we’ve no choice but to see what happens when the other shoe drops.
How much is this going to cost? Anyone know? What about de-funding the police?
So I read an article that said the Democrats gave missed the 60-day window to change rules proposed by the Trump administration. Does that mean that the proposed SORNA changes through the Dept of Justice are final?