ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (11/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings


General News

National Action Alert: Write and Call! SORNA Regulations Moving Forward, Now Awaiting AG Approval

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved proposed SORNA regulations issued more than a year ago.  This is a significant step forward toward finalization of the regulations which are now under consideration by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Many registrants would have to register every three months, disclose their mail addresses, disclose what websites they log on to, disclose where they travel to, and many other requirements!

Listen to the recording of our Nov 1  Zoom online meeting

“Every registrant, family member and supporter must voice their opposition to the proposed SORNA regulations,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “This is the only possible way to stop the regulations from causing great harm to every person on the registry as well as their families. We have to overcome our fears and make enough noise for them to hear us! Hiding will not work. Violence will not work. Call and write! You will feel more empowered if you do. Click here to read my new Janice’s Journal about SORNA.”

ACSOL recommends that individuals state their opposition to the proposed SORNA regulations by using ALL these different methods:

  1. First, call the U. S. Department of Justice and leave a comment on the agency’s comment line at 1-202-353-1555
  2. Second, send an online message to the agency (the general topic is “message to attorney general) at
  3. Third, mail a letter to Attorney General Garland at U.S. Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. 20530-0001.

Each communication should include the following information and/or information in the attached response which was developed by a team of legal professionals and sent to the U. S. Department of Justice in September 2020.

  • Subject: Oppose proposed SORNA regulations Proposed Rulemaking, Docket No. OAG 157 (AG Order No. 4759–2020)
  • Proposed regulations would significantly harm almost 1 million U.S. families, and how yours would be affected.
  • Proposed regulations are vague because they create requirements that registrants cannot meet such as registering up to 4 times a year. Explain how you would be affected.
  • Proposed regulations have a chilling effect on travel within U.S. that will harm family members in need as well as limit educational opportunities. Tell how this affects you.
  • Proposed regulations violate state rights to determine registration procedures. Describe how you feel about them overriding your state’s desires for doing registration.
  • Proposed regulations have a chilling effect on First Amendment rights of registrants because they require disclosure of remote communications identifiers. Explain how this would impact you.


  • If you take the time to write an original letter it will be given more weight than if looks like you just copied and pasted the same text that other people used.
  • Be cordial, don’t flame. They will throw it out if you rage.
  • Get to your talking points fast. Long letters are not necessarily best.
  • Refer to something personal you have experienced that they need to know.

There is no deadline by which Attorney General Garland must reach a final decision regarding the proposed SORNA regulations.  Therefore, that decision could be made at any time.  The decision of the Attorney General will be published in the Federal Register and Congress will have 30 days to review that decision before it becomes law.

– – – – – – The form below is a non-working replica of the form on the DOJ website- – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – that can be found at this link – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Your message to the Department of Justice

Messages to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be submitted via this form.

Your question or comments will be forwarded to the responsible Department of Justice component for appropriate handling.

Please note:

  • Before sending us your information, please read [the DOJ] Website Privacy Policy and the Privacy Statement below for details about how [the DOJ] handle[s] personal information.
  • This form should not be used for service of official, case-related or legal documents because it is not monitored for such submissions or for other time-sensitive communications.
  • If you know the specific organization or official you wish to contact, please indicate such in your message or check the Component Contact Information Page to contact them directly.

In some instances the volume of communication on a particular issue is such that we cannot respond to each message individually. We would like you to know, however, that all incoming messages are forwarded to the appropriate organization within the Department of Justice and you can be assured that your voices and views are being heard.

Updated September 14, 2021

ACSOL’s Response to the proposed regulations:

Download a PDF of the following letter

Download the PDF file .

Download the PDF file .


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

Rot in hell Barr

I don’t think Hell would have him, maybe a swamp.

Couldn’t have asked for a bigger Piece of S*%T, To start the S*%T SHOW !

Bill Barr looks like the turtle from “ Never Ending Story”. A face a cigarette butt wouldn’t want to touch.

We can’t agree to allocate money towards keeping bridges from collapsing, but this gets a budget approval. USA is a damn joke and the rest of the world is catching on damn quick.


There is no budget related to this beyond what is already in place annually to implement SORNA. It is all administrative and falls on the states to implement in the end with the person forced to register having to keep up. More states may ask for money to implement these, but more states may not either.

I swear I recalled reading when this first came out that this will include additional funds to implement this.


They may fold it under the current SORNA budget to start (say using leftover funds which can be internally reprogrammed) but any additional funds beyond that which could be appropriated for it have to be requested and then approved by Congress.

The implementation and enforcement of the new SORNA Regulations would probably fall upon the US Marshal Service which, I suspect, has plenty of money floating around because they’re currently spending it going city to city, nationwide, to help implement compliance checks. 😡

(Wait… Are compliance checks so onerous and labor intensive that local authorities require federal assistance to conduct them ….. Even when local authorities receive many thousands of dollars of additional funds each year to support of local registries and compliance checks?? 🤔🤨

One thing that has been on my mind frequently is, If we had our felony reduced to a misdemeanor, will SORNA see it as a felony or a misdemeanor?, And, will we be required to register under SORNA, once California becomes FULLY compliant? So do we have to wait until full compliance before we have to register under SORNA?

So, it’s basically the same shit, different boss. Whoever’s president doesn’t matter. [snip]

You didn’t actually think that registrants were going to be better off under Biden, did you? None of them care about registrants.

Time to come out of the shadows and make noise. Not by violence, not by silence, but by showing up, standing up, and speaking out till our voices are heard. This bull crap is worse than feeding Audrey 2 from ” Little Shop of Horrors.”

Oh shit just real I no longer have a country; yet I’ll fight like hell at our government for violating our rights.

“I love my country, it is my government I am ashamed of” (though it is hard at times to love the entire country but try to not throw the baby out with the bath water)

I wonder. I always imagined things had to get worse before they get better. Is this the point where the system becomes so unwieldy, it starts to fall apart?

👍🏻 Well, Sam, if this nightmare SORNA goes into effect, I will certainly do my part to make the system tilt toward implosion by constantly and endlessly requiring them to keep updating my file. I will forever be adding new internet identifiers, email addresses, tattoos, whatever. I will create and register 30 new never-to-be-used-again email addresses every week! Hell, maybe I’ll get a new tattoo* every week just so the government authorities will have to constantly keep updating my file!
It’s time to get creative!! 😈😈😈
I’ll make certain they’ll need to employ one entire full-time government humanoid just to keep my DOJ file up-to-date!!! 👹👹👹

*Tattoos?? For example, a little 1-centimeter square ⬛ here, a little circle ⚫ there, maybe a little hashmark “#” on that arm and a little question mark “?” on the other….. ….. just to have those same tattoos removed/lasered off a few months later… ….thereby creating yet another mandatory file updating notification to DOJ!! LOL! 🤣 And all will be properly documented and submitted in a timely manner to the appropriate authorities via certified, return receipt mail** …… or however they wish to keep their sh*t documented and up-to-date! If I am required to go into the registration office every week, so be it – I will work it into my schedule!!🤣🤣🤣

** Certified, return receipt letters?? Oh yes, each letter I send to the DOJ will be carefully typed in a nice blindingly tiny 4-point, impossible-to-read font. Oh, rest assured, I will make them suffer for this onerous nightmare they’re creating!! I will use every resource at my disposal to turn this nightmare right back on them!!

I like David’s idea of creating of continuously creating internet identifiers that will never be used to overwhelm the system. In the past, someone else here brought up that idea too.

I use to think that escalation to the point of implosion was a good idea. Trying to overburden the system and hoping they will give up becuase its not worth it. Or supporting ideas like animal abuse and domestic violence registries hoping they will finally reveal the absurdity of registries. But if you look at history, it only shows that these policies born out of hate have no limit and will not be checked by rationality at any point. They will return any escalation 10 fold. There will be no limit, hundreds of millions on the registry and death penalty punishment and beyond. The only hope is what Janice is doing, which is trying to slow down the progression with levelheaded arguments for constitutional rights.

HA HA you sound like Will now , I live for his post to make me feel better , Good idea’s David .

This is awful but not surprising at all. Janice, what happens now with CA? Does this change our entire Tiered System. 288’s on tier 3 and now CP on Tier 1. I think this is the big worry for many of us. Do you feel CA will follow and finally become SORNA compliant? Thank you.

No. This won’t impact what CA or other non-SORNA states do. Which is why Janice and others are so against this. It creates a dual system which PFR’s won’t legally be able to manage. It’s also ambiguous as to how it may impact states in this regard, leading to the whole state sovereignty thing. If this gets struck down in courts, it won’t be because of how it impacts PFR’s but because of how it impacts states being able to do what they want.

@SR, don’t be so sure. The duty to attempt to register will be on the person previously convicted of the underlying sex offense. If they go to a registration authority to attempt to register, even though the state does not require them to register, that doesn’t mean that wherever they attempt to register can not choose to take the registration information and put then onto the registry anyway if the way their systems work would let them do this. Therefore, it absolutely can impact those in non-SORNA states because if they don’t at least try (or from what it seems they really want people do do is beg to be on the registry) to get themselves back on the registry and subsequently leave their states border at anytime ever, even for 10 seconds, they can be arrested for a federal FTR crime.

As a refresher, here are earlier ACSOL articles about what the proposed SORNA changes will mean for Registrants:

Hope this is helpful to everyone.

We REALLY need everyone to fight against these horrendous SORNA changes!

Thanks @David for the references. Definitely needed to refresh n gather discussion points.

If there was ever a time to over-turn Smith v. Doe (2003), it is the present. This will vitiate the vested rights of any and all individuals who have successfully been removed from their registration requirements under operation of State law, especially those with Court orders stating they no longer have a duty to register.

Are you saying a COR will no longer be valid and those who obtained it will go back on the registry?

Yes. That is what this bill is about. It puts it on the individual to ensure compliance with SORNA, because the feds can’t make the State’s change their laws. Thus, even though you have a COR, this new rule will require that present yourself to State authorities up to 4-times a year (based on Federal Tier) and attempt to register.

If the State refuses to register you, fine, but you will need some proof you tried to comply with federal law. Otherwise, its federal FTR. My interpretation.

Plus, if you travel across state lines, SORNA applies to you regardless of your registration status within your State. Your State says 10-years, lets you off. 20-years later, you want to travel to Italy but are unaware or do not think the 21-day notification applies to you because you are not required to register under state law (but are Tier 3 under SORNA). You get arrested trying to board the plane.

So a misdemeanor would be tier 1, correct? Which means 10/15 years since conviction, I’m assuming? Do you know how it works for anyone who falls into tier 1 that’s already surpassed the 15 year mark? Would they just be crossed over and not added or would they be added before being removed?

Our government is sick, twisted, and evil. Nothing changes!

I just want to make sure this is titled correctly…I presume that before noon.ish tomorrow someone will have an answer before I go to the post office…in any case please check the “Re:”

Attorney General Merrick Garland
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001

   Re: SORNA Proposed Rulemaking, Docket No. OAG 157 (AG Order No. 4759–2020)

The re will go on the front of the envelope also.

(truth is that I am probably a little distressed by the new TN registration, {which is terrible!}, the new requirements for outbound travel from SMART, and now this….sigh, life was livable before Smith v Doe…. and it has gotten more terrible every year since so I have a real reason for my active depression)

Best Wishes, James I

MORE FEDERAL LAW INTRUSION into the day to day lives of individual citizens sovereignty clearly denoted as a State’s domain. A republic not kept.

Here they come, you guys still wanna keep trying hold on to whats left of your old lives, the other hafe of people on the list hide in the shadows to ashamed
to step into the light.
The feds are just waiting for every state to finish reclassify offenders, then they’ll come in and put their stamp on it.
15-25 years on the registry for Tier 1, Tier2 offenders and life for all Tier 3 offenders.
Unfortunately this doesn’t have any impact on my life, I wish people would just stop trying be normal and become the nightmare their so afraid of, A sex offender with a voice willing to fight back.
The only reason SONRA was created because the sex offender community was starting to get to big they might cause some kind of up rising and states started growing tired of managing sex offenders and started creating was for them to possibly go free the federal government ain’t letting no one go free anytime soon

Good luck yall

Last edited 1 month ago by AERO1

Ha ha ha ha ha.

I’m praying they come. I’ve truly enjoyed destroying them at every step and delivering the consequences they so deserve. I love the motivation and it really makes me feel alive.

I would say that if they knew the actual consequences of their harassment that they would destroy the Oppression Lists (OLs) immediately, but they don’t actually care about children or people. They don’t care if everyone in America suffers because of the OLs. All they care about is feeling smug and getting themselves off.

Oh well. I’m so excited to escalate this war. In fact, I’ll start before they do.

Ha ha ha ha ha. Sic semper tyrannis.

This is terrible. I’m pretty sure the goal is to make SORNA as convoluted as possible so that even though registration is non punitive, the laws are impossible to follow with the ultimate goal of punishing, re-punishing and punishing even some more anyone who ever committed a sex offense using FTR.

They especially want to re-punish those who haven been on a registry for a long time (like me not having been on any registry for almost 12 years – after spending 11 years on one) by those people having no clue they are expected to attempt some kind of registration even though not required by state law and then nailing them with a federal FTR and locking them up for far longer than their original sentence.

Stated another way, those of us who committed crimes back before this country became ridiculously crazy about sex crimes – and received ‘too good’ of plea deals because the punishments we’re more reasonable (there was more judicial discretion for punishments tailored to the specific circumstances of the crime), can not possibly have been properly punished enough Therefore, the goal is to get these ones on an FTR, you know like 23+ years later so they can lock them up again and get a do over punishment disguised as an FTR. Nice!

Yes, M C, it’s crazy!!!
I have no idea what online internet identifiers I have! My cell phone carrier has assigned one to me! The travel website I use has assigned one to me! Synchrony Bank has assigned one to me. For Christ’s sake, the f*cking US Marshal Service has assigned one to me!!! I have no idea how many of these internet identifiers I have!!
What a perfect way to charge anyone with FTR!!! 😡😡😡

As I said earlier, these goddamned LEOs better stay the f*ck away from me for a while, ’til I’ve cooled off! 😡😡😡

Yep FTR is their number one weapon.✌🤓

It is. Which is why preemptive retaliation is best.

If this were really about protecting the public as they claim, then there would also be a ‘murderer’ registry, a ‘drug dealer’ registry, and a DUI registry. This plainly shows they are NOT interested in protecting the public or those offenders would have a registry too.
They are liars!!

Of course. That’s obvious to people with brains. But “people” who support the Oppression Lists don’t have brains. Have to reach them with pictures, memes, or something.

Why can’t ALI or it’s members step in or ask to meet with the President, or the AG. This would go completely against their recommendations, and the President and the AG need to be contacted. This is not a political issue, and i think that ALI should step in as they have enough clout to get a meeting. I couldn’t find anything on their website that states that they can’t or wont get involved.
The more rights that are stripped away from a group of Americans, the more there is the probability that rights will be stripped from all Americans. Much of America is feeling that right now, and they are not liking it and are getting angry. For Americas sake they need to use their power and influence in this instance.

I have taken, at least my formal letter, in a different direction. I believe that the only time we have ever made any progress is when Janice and other members of our community have had the opportunity to present live testimony before legislative bodies in Sacramento and elsewhere.

My Plea to the AG is to send these proposed rules to appropriate Senate and House committees for full public scrutiny that the rules will apply to and allow an honest hearing on their terrible destructiveness.

At least that is my position early this morning.

I wish everyone well, James I

PS the Law is nice ‘n all and it is an avenue to strongly pursue…but public testimony on the laws and rules that affect us is I believe our real road to freedom….our stories are strong and good, our cause righteous…but it needs to be publicly heard!

I think this was created specifically to address the ALI Model Penal Code change. USDOJ is a member of ALI, but got ignored by majority vote. This is their way of pushing back, to say, no matter what the State’s do, they have the final say.

@ Scooby: It’s my understanding:
1. ALI is an academic legal organization. It does not participate in lobbying or the creation of any specific legislation or Bills.
2. ALI presents their recommendations for legislators to review and use to amend existing laws, repeal bad laws, or create new and better laws.
(My understanding, FWIW)

@David: The organization and it’s members can at a minimum contact people that are directly or indirectly involved with this issue to let them know about the enormous work that went into their project. The organization and it’s members worked on this project for 12 years, and I’m sure they would not want their project to go to waste. They do not have to lobby or influence if they can’t, but reaching out so to educate others would not hurt them or their reputation i wouldn’t think.

Everyone, look up as many names as you can on the registry and start sending them physical mails on this issue, so that they can be alerted to alert their families, friends and allies on this issues! They need to get involved, and there’s no other way to contact them to inform them!

We need to do it!! No excuse.

And, if I have to be labeled some troublemaking busybody on the way, it is well worth the irritation.

Wouldn’t these rules be immediately at odds with the Federal Does II decision, which stated that forcing existing registrants in Michigan to provide Internet IDs was ex post facto punishment, as were tier assignments? It seems like enforcement of this rule could be stopped with an injunction?

So all the work that has been done in Michigan with our lawsuits are for naught.
And the government wonders why some people blow up government buildings. If this crap goes into law, I’m moving out of this damn country. Enough is enough.

Let me know where. I’m interested in leaving, but maybe that is there point…

Merrick Garland was recently a member of the American Law Institute, which just drafted recommendations AGAINST Sorna! He knows all the research that went into it. Why would he even THINK of considering this?? Makes no sense.

does anything ever make sense in government?

Just because he is a member doesn’t mean he agreed with the ALI.

AG Garland was or is an ALI member? Regardless, he has or had the ability to see the machinations behind their recommendations.

Why would he consider this? Because his predecessor left it in the inbox for him to do so via his staff. Since it will only take a pen stroke to implement these, especially with the voices of those who believe these are good, e.g. John Walsh, et al, playing in his head, this is another way for him to do some greater good, in his mind, that he was not able to do a few years back when he was not considered for SCOTUS by the Senate.

Has anyone reached out to Patty Wetterling about this effort and gotten her recent thoughts, if any? She went from pro to against the registry, so her voice may be of great help.

What we see with this cowardly adoption of a fascist Barr Justice Department travesty is the same phenomenon at play when Obama signed IML – an entirely Republican construct – into law. The Democrats make the expedient political calculation that they cannot afford to be seen as soft on “pedophiles” and, despite knowing that the law is unconstitutional and ineffective, adopt it as a means of advancing their own popularity with the grotesquely uninformed who make up so much of our country today.

Too True @NDIK

Because politics.

This should get interesting. In the 6th circuit federal court, it has been declared that the registry IS punishment. How can they retroactively increase the punishment?

It seems that the feds are butt hurt because their golden goose is being called what it is with a capital P.

If this would be approved could be the catalyst to get Smith Vs Doe overturned. Now I have more questions than answers.

Its sick BUT …… This is what they did to all of us in Michigan years ago ,Via mail man lol (letter of life, life sentence by mail man ) that our state sent us in 2011 its crazy to see 10 years later they have decided to apply it to the entire nation , Welcome to the retroactive club ! This is Punitive and Punishment at the Highest Level . Looks like the Supreme Court will get its wish. They asked for something else to rule on this is it “The Big Fish” its time we all get back our rights its going to take something like this for them to finally realize they have taken this way to far. We couldn’t have got any luckier then to have Mr Bill Barr as the ring leader. Hail to the Chiefs ! .. BATTLES ON CHARGE !!!!!!!

Thank you Janice for bringing this to our attention. I went ahead and left a detailed voice message with the DOJ expressing my absolute displeasure about this recent proposed bill on where they are considering registraints to register every 3 months. Enough is enough! Everyone who is on the registration, including their family and friends, all need to stand up and fight to regain our freedom that continues to be taken away from us on a daily basis. I am all for peaceful demonstrations, where every registrant, families and friends unite to fight against the horrible injustices that this country continues to impose against us in regards to our civil rights. The demonization against all registraints from our society needs to end now!

Ok. Here’s the thing. If you are under Megan’s law, he CANNOT put you under a new law, because that means the sentence handed down by your original Judge would be vacated by him and he would be re-sentencing you making him into a ‘Judge’ himself, and he cannot constitutionally do that due to ‘Separation of Powers’ no matter how you slice it or how you word it.
You cannot instantly place someone from a previous law under a new law without a new trial and due process, because that is a RAPE and violation of the legal system and the Constitution!!

I encourage everyone to act on this. I called, messaged and sent my letter. We all know this will significantly impact each and everyone of us in horrific ways. Venting to each other is therapeutic, but it would serve the cause more to take the time to First call, message, write and mail your concerns to Garland, then take the time to vent on this board. Action first, venting second. The naysayers will all tell me that it will do no good, but how do you know if you don’t try? I thought the same negative thoughts a decade ago when I met Janice. I thought she was out of her mind thinking she could change things. But she did. Now its our turn. Call, message and write!

I have forwarded the email to several others, I have left a message on the phone line, I have emailed, and I wrote a letter. If the millions affected by these changes all do all 3, they will be tabulating for months. I also included a statement about the burden on local law enforcement. We are short about 25% of officers now. Not possible for this to be implemented fairly.

Thank you, JD, for showing up, standing up and speaking up!

can we call, email/online, write more than one time, i.e. each once a day? Thanks

Per the regulations, if I communicate online with my financial institution or post a message online with my financial institution, then I am required within 3 days to report my financial institution login to LE. And do not forget, you can no longer chat with any company representatives online without reporting if the chat box shows you have an id. And some companies make that the only option available for communication. This is batsh_t crazy.

“All designations the sex offender uses for
purposes of routing or self-identification in Internet or telephonic communications or postings, including e-mail addresses and telephone numbers.”

At least with my state they only want the information if it is social.

I noted last year this could be the impetus to get the entire punishing regime reviewed in court if it is agreed to by Congress who has final review authority. That could force CJ Roberts front and center to see his case reviewed and how it has grown in nearly 19 years – to adult stature – and wildly out of control.

I already see this as an end-run around the 4th Amendment WRT email identifiers: the major search engines have email services and those search engines already have in place agreements with the USG to help provide data as needed during searches as well as through courts, etc when it needs it. Who says emails are different? If the USG wants to have your emails searched and contacts these providers by data you provided, then you lost, as I see it, the right to appeal for an unlawful search. They will do it and not tell you, until they know they have what they need and then will proceed within the law to get the data they know already is there. You don’t have to provide a code or password because under the 5th Amendment you are free from having to do that but the USG will work around that as we know they can do probably through the Terms of Service agreement each provider has. Have to wonder what EFF thinks of this?

This may be a bit much for some, and not conspiracy theory either, but this is not just like giving a physical address where a search warrant is needed to physically enter. An electronic identifier, e.g. email, phone number, online identifiers, etc, can be searched without anyone knowing it once it is provided. There is a reason why those who have convictions where a minor was involved have to provide their email identifiers according to the USG; now, the USG wants to expand that to everyone forced to register for an unknown reason.

Maybe I am a bit lost here, but hasn’t this been a law since 2008(?)? What has changed now with this latest development that will forces all States to conform. Can States still decide what is best for them and not abide by these draconian laws, much like the majority have been doing since its implementation?


in comments from yesterday David provided links to the post about how the proposed changes will affect registrants and their families.

please feel free to review.

One of the major changes is that if the state no longer requires you to register but the federal SORNA would require you to register – even if you have been off the registry for many years – you will need to essentially beg the state to register you anyway or face a potential FTR charge. In general if you live somewhere where the requirements places on you are already more strict or as strict as fed SORNA there
isn’t much changed for you.

The current rule until changed by this is that if you are off the registry you would not go back on unless you re-enter the criminal justice system unless the state chooses to adopt a more strict rule – of course if a state is not SORNA compliant you may still not be put back on under the current rule.

If the State does not want to play the Feds game of register everyone we say to, then who will be the ones who patrol the streets for Federal FTRs if it will not be the State and its law enforcement? Are they going to employ thousands of new FBI agents specifically for this task? And if the Feds decide they want to play cop, do they have jurisdiction to just come and arrest those in a given state just because they want to?

Unless a State is willing to submit to all the demands, I cannot for the life of me see how this shit show even works.

It will be the U.S. Marshalls and not the FBI to enforce this. They are already enforcing a great deal of registration “violations.”

LOL! Steve, the US Marshal Service has been going around the United States teaming up with local law enforcement to do annual compliance (a/k/a “harassment”) checks of registered citizens. No doubt, they will simply shift the new tasks over to the Marshal Service who seems to enjoy it so much. After all, it’s USMS that’s in charge of AngelWatch and green notices. And you know they love that stuff! 🤮

No, this has not been the law since 2008. A major part of the proposed SORNA regulations is an attempt by the federal government to make individuals comply with federal regulations that must be implemented by state governments. The regulations do not, of course, provide additional funding to state governments for that implementation. A clear example is the requirement for some individuals who currently register only once a year to register four times a year. Registration is done by state and local government officials, not the federal government so it places some registrants in a very dangerous position. Specifically, they are required to register four times a year by the federal government but the state/local government refuses to do that. If someone violates federal law, they could spent up to 10 years in federal prison.

I dont see California makeing Tier 2 offenders come in every 6 months and all Tier 3 offenders come in every 3 months it’s counterproductiv, California is already struggling and trying hard to manage the registry the new SORNA would literally set California back 5 years.
If your Tier 1 or 2 and you live in California your good but if you ever leave the state of California you will be subjected to SORNA laws.
Here in California we have the power to literally destroy the registry we have the numbers out here, ACSOL should put me on their staff so I could unleash Hell on the federal government and the DOJ, I’d easily organize at least 5.000 sex offenders in California in 24 months.

Stay focused.

You make good points, but don’t you see CA rearranging the Tiers to match federal SORNA? That’s going to add back the 40,000 to Tier 3. I hope it does inundate them. But hi well, they don’t care. LE does not like registrants.

I did my three tasks and I’ll keep doing it. Strength in numbers

Thank you, Brandon! You are a hero.

Is this what finally gets SCOTUS to look at this bs? i surely hope so.This is a gross abuse of the original Doe case.

I live in a SORNA compliant state, so honestly I don’t know what to think. Regardless this crap must be stopped or drastically altered at best. My first visit with the game of a mole with the government and I hate it. Time for a Boulder to drop on their “ public safety” bs. Happy Halloween to Registrant Nation!!

Thank you so much Janice for bringing this to our attention. One small quibble: states don’t have “rights,” only people have rights. States have powers granted to them by the citizenry and which can be revoked by the people. We should stop using the term “state’s rights” because no where in the Constitution is it used nor was it intended as a concept by the Founders and to use it degrades our own, actual, rights.

“72.1 …(b) This part does not preempt or limit any obligations of or requirements relating to sex offenders under other Federal laws, rules, or policies, or under the laws, rules, or policies of registration jurisdictions or other entities. States and other governmental entities may prescribe registration requirements and other requirements, with which sex offenders must comply, that are more extensive or stringent than those prescribed by SORNA”

So it doesn’t lessen any obligation under any other source (i.e., State law), it also does not preempt a state from many more onerous rules. Wasn’t Federal SORNA touted and passed under the flag of making a “uniform” set of laws across the nation?

Instead, it raised the floor of severity (making many states non-compliant), but still allows even worse things to be added on. Not very “uniform” if you ask me.

One thing it does do is vitiate any vested rights obtained under State law. Generally, the legislature cannot divest rights through retrospective rulemaking/lawmaking, such is a violation of due process. This even applies in the civil context. See, Mitchell v. Roberts (Utah 2020) as an example of this argument.

Should we add color to why we oppose each bullet point of the information that is to be included with each communication to the AG, or just copy/paste? I would hate to say too little or too much.

@ c: My opinion: I would strongly recommend that you let your letter speak for yourself. Do NOT make it an exact, cookie-cutter copy of someone else’s letter.
If you wish to add color, highlighting, bolding, underlining, etc, do so! 👍🏻

It needs to be clear to AG Garland that all these letters he is receiving are coming from separate individuals who are concerned about the same important and urgent issue: the new SORNA Regulations.

Thank you. David, By, “color,” of course, I meant additional information including why I’m opposed to each of those bullet points. I’ll definitely make sure to personalize it.

I wonder if it’s possible to appeal to Mr. Garland through a Jewish foundation or directly to him regarding his families persecution, and escape from persecution. He or his family may be affiliated with an organization that may be receptive to our claim of persecution. “The Garlands are members of Temple Sinai, a Reform congregation in the capital, where both of Garland daughters, Rebecca and Jessica, reportedly had their bat mitzvahs.”
“Garland was the grandson of Jewish immigrants who in the early 1900s fled the Pale of Settlement—the western regions of the Russian Empire to which Jews were then restricted—to escape anti-Semitism.”
ACSOL and it’s leaders need to get on this and reach out to whatever Jewish orginazations they can to appeal to them that a prominent Jewish person might be inclined to sign into law a bill that would continue and enhance the persecution of fellow American Jews and other vulnerable people including juveniles.

Hi, Janice,
I need to know: do individual states still have the freedom to decide whether or not it’s SORNA-compliant? (For example, California currently isn’t.)
This isn’t going to make me any less concerned for those registrants who do live in states that are. I just want to know if these new SORNA regulations will force California to implement them.

Last edited 1 month ago by AC

Marrick Garland quote: “I think the rule of law is what distinguishes our country from most other countries,” Garland says in the video. “It’s people’s willingness to trust that they don’t have to take justice into their own hands, that law will treat people fairly and impartially, and without regard to politics or religion or race or anything else.”
I wonder if he would include us in regards to having to taking justice into our own hands, and by “anything else” would he include us?

I was perusing the SMART site, specifically the report on California’s implementation of SORNA and noticed the following footnote (footnote 14):

“Offenders receiving such a withdrawal of a guilty plea or set aside of their guilty verdict will no longer meet the definition of “convicted” under SORNA and, as such, are no longer required by SORNA to register.”

Here is the link to the document:

I am not sure how to take this, given it is in a passing footnote, but it does seem to clearly state that those who have been granted a 1203.4 will not be subject to SORNA. Can someone else read the attached document and shed some light on this?

Yes Steve, I also read the same thing if you receive the 1203.4 in California you are no longer considered”convicted” according to SORNA. I’m gathering that this is an actual fact! Anybody else want to chime in to this please respond thank you

@Steve and CA

I also read it the same way. I had thought such a statement would not exist and didn’t think to look for it. I appreciate that you both looked at it posted on it.

I am curious to see why California has that clause about being set aside and for the reasons not convicted. I have mine set aside in Texas, but I found this on the New guidelines today. I am reading it like regardless of whether a state has it set aside, the feds still count it as a conviction. I wanted some help clarifying this.

Since the SORNA registration requirements are predicated on convictions, registration (or continued registration) usually is not required under the SORNA standards if the predicate conviction is reversed, vacated, or set aside, or if the person is pardoned for the offense on the ground of innocence. 
This does not mean, however, that nominal changes or terminological variations that do not relieve a conviction of substantive effect negate the SORNA requirements. For example, the need to require registration would not be avoided by a jurisdiction’s having a procedure under which the convictions of sex offenders in certain categories (e.g., young adult sex offenders who satisfy certain criteria) are referred to as something other than “convictions,” or under which the convictions of such sex offenders may nominally be “vacated” or “set aside,” but the sex offender is nevertheless required to serve what amounts to a criminal sentence for the offense. Rather, an adult sex offender is “convicted” for SORNA purposes if the sex offender remains subject to penal consequences based on the conviction, however it may be styled. Likewise, the sealing of a criminal record or other action that limits the publicity or availability of a conviction, but does not deprive it of continuing legal validity, does not change its status as a “conviction” for purposes of SORNA.

I’ve done all 3 and have gotten 6 non-registrant family members to also do this. Hopefully everyone who has not already done so will do the same.

The meeting today was really good. It eased my anxieties abit. Still alot of questions…process process process.

I just filled out the forms to send to AG ( email and letter) …will call tomorrow too.

Thank you Janice and Chance !!!!

I thought that CASOMB recommended to the CA DOJ, not to accept SORNA in California about a decade ago or so?
From what I remember reading: that the state (pre sb 384 of course) would just be better off keeping things the way they were. I can’t see that their opinion has changed in this matter. If anybody wants to elaborate please do so thank you:)

@ca, I know it’s confusing but the State regulations are not the same as Federal. Federal SORNA created a set of rules and laws where states were responsible for collecting and providing registrant data to the feds and were supposed to adopt the federal rules as a minimum standard with access to certain federal funds being the way to encourage states to change laws to make them comply. Non SORNA states have for various reasons have declined to fully adopt the federal standards. These new guidelines are the federal government’s attempt to do what amounts to an end-run around whatever pieces of SORNA the states have chosen not to adopt in their own laws. In other words, they are trying to force you to comply with the federal SORNA requirements that have not been adopted by the state even in the cases where someone has been removed from the state duty to register.

Done, done & done! A little disappointed that I wasn’t able to speak with Merrick in person, but I left him a VM. And sent an email. And mailed him a letter! 👍🏻


Thank you for reaching out to the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) with your recent inquiry. 
It appears you have a question about whether or not you are required to register as a sex offender under SORNA and you reference an excerpt from the SMART Office’s SORNA Substantial Implementation Review for California dated January 2016 in support of the same. 
In December 2017, the California Legislature passed SB 384, legislation which amended California’s sex offender registration laws. It went into effect on January 1, 2021, and, among the many revisions made by the legislation, it changed California’s lifetime sex offender registration scheme to a tier-based scheme. As a result of this legislation, some of the laws included in the above-referenced review are no longer current. Additional information about the legislation is also available here.
Additionally, please note that SORNA provides a comprehensive set of minimum standards for sex offender registration and notification in the United States and, generally speaking, sex offender registration and the registration process is governed by the jurisdiction where an offender was convicted or might live, work, or go to school. The obligation to register is based on an offender’s conviction and an offender may be required to register based on that conviction in any jurisdiction where the offender lives, works, or goes to school. So, even though you may not be required to register in California, you may still be required to register elsewhere. Each jurisdiction has the authority to register individuals (and to dictate the terms of that registration). 
SORNA also imposes certain registration obligations on sex offenders as a matter of federal law. In other words, sex offenders have an independent duty to register under SORNA. 
Thank you and we hope you will find this information helpful. If you have any further questions, you may want to speak with an attorney who can provide you with specific legal advice.

So, NOT-SMART said, “Blah, blah, blah, blah. This is all such a huge pile of feces that a normal person can’t figure it out on their own. We can’t either. Sometimes we just arrest people and throw it into courts for them to figure something out. I guess you need an attorney on retainer for the rest of your life. Because we are too stupid, giant, bureaucratic, lazy, careless, and uncaring to do anything smart enough to be easily implemented, understood, and followed.”

That aside, I’d respond back to them that I didn’t appreciate them calling me names. I’d ask them what derogatory names I could call them. I would tell them the default names will be a**hole and scumbag.

De-fund all government at all level. De-fund all of their law enforcement criminals. Vote for politicians who believe in small government.

There appears to be a bit of circular reasoning going on with the Feds: Federal Law says you must register; however, States have different laws; nevertheless Federal Law requires…. This reply only confirms the confusion that now exists with respect to State vs. Federal Law.

Each jurisdiction has the authority to register individuals (and to dictate the terms of that registration).”

And what if a given jurisdiction doesn’t want to register, but the Federal Law says they must. What then? Again, there is nothing but confusion.

SORNA also imposes certain registration obligations on sex offenders as a matter of federal law. In other words, sex offenders have an independent duty to register under SORNA.”

So, do I go to the White House and register with Biden, or to Congress and see Pelosi? This makes no freaking sense to the logical, common sense mind. If the State doesn’t want to register, well then who in God’s green earth are we suppose to go to and sign up with?

Kamala Harris of course.

“Each jurisdiction has the authority to register individuals (and to dictate the terms of that registration).

SORNA also imposes certain registration obligations on sex offenders as a matter of federal law. In other words, sex offenders have an independent duty to register under SORNA. ”

Sure sounds like the STUPID (S)ex Offender (T)errorists who are (U)ntruthful (P)aranoid (I)gnorant and (D)isgraceful
office has already implemented the new guidelines prior to approval by the AG.

The jurisdiction has the authority to register individuals and dictate the terms – in other words the jurisdiction can dictate the terms despite the requirement of registering or not in the jurisdiction and therefore the offender must exercise their independent duty regardless because the jurisdiction has the authority to stick them on the registry despite the state law. At least that’s what it seems to me.

I was just trying to find clarification on this. I live in a sorna state. Current state law says I have to notify my registry office if I am at another address for 7 consecutive days. But they “ask me to notify them if I travel for 3 days”. First they would just put the travel information in computer. Now they have me signing papers saying I will go register where I’m visiting”. And none of this is in my yearly registration contract. Does anybody have an opinion on this and what Is the best course of action? I think a lawyer would say follow the law and not what they ask.

@Stark, You shouldn’t need to do more than what the law says. That said, the state you are visiting might have a requirement that you register within a certain period of time and there are also federal requirements regarding registration. You will need to comply with the requirements where you are visiting.

They may be trying to make sure you have fair warning of your requirements in other states. The most strict states require visitors to register there within 3 days. Therefore you avoid potential issues if you make it a point to just notify every state you visit within that 3 day period and if you agree to that, nobody can say you didn’t know about it.

@MC many states it is 48 hours, good luck if you arrive on Friday night

Stay away from Florida if you are forced to register. They’ll keep you on for life and even in death.

Yes I always call ahead and check the local ordinance and the state laws. That’s a whole other can of worms. It’s a roll of the dice if they will have a clue or just make something up. At the ending of the day there’s no flying saucer following me around and timing my presence. I keep away from planning trips to those 48 hr states. Anybody needing a cheat sheet I will paste link here

And another one here

“Obligations” and “duty.”

Sounds like an unpaid job to me. Is it my “duty” to surrender every aspect of my life to do charity work?

“SORNA also imposes”

You see that’s just it. This whole train wreck is just an IMPOSITION that we’re subjugated with – forever.


It is the obligation of the criminal regimes to pay consequences for their Oppression List harassment. It is an obligation that they will comply with, whether they want to or not. They have no choice.

emailed, wrote a letter, and called.

Good for you Fred. I’m a bit behind you, but am working on it. Calling is the easiest of the three, but even that can be somewhat daunting. To get over any reluctance, I recommend editing a script and reading it out loud until it feels comfortable. I tend to babble otherwise on answering machines. It was actually fun to work on the flow of words and inflection. By the time I picked up the phone, the words just flowed.

Very smart. Always best to be prepared. I rarely do anything significant without at least a checklist of items to cover.

I needed it for this too or otherwise it would have been nothing but cursing, insulting them, and calling them names. Not so effective. I had to pretend they have brains and I give a f*** what they think.

Just to inform anyone else, the call has a time limit. I believe it’s 60 seconds. But it also interrupts you at like 45 seconds to inform you that your time has almost run out. Really annoying!

Thx Mich 4 “Heads Up”

I didn’t hear that time warning, so apparently my phone message was under 45 seconds. Brevity was one of the reasons I practiced and edited my phone script. I saved any real discussion for my 3-page letter. I presume letters will be scanned initially by overworked low-level staff members. They may get no further than the subject line that simply stated, “Re: Opposition to Proposed SORNA regulations, Docket No. OAG 157.” This and five specific topic headers were in bold to quickly catch the eye, and the subsequent arguments no more than two short paragraphs.

I tried to remember that although my letter was addressed TO Merrick Garland, it was written FOR bureaucrats and staff attorneys. I sent it certified thinking that it might appear to have a bit more gravitas. Like most primates, bureaucrats are attracted to shiny objects.


LOL…well, this shows that you thought about this deeply and so good on you for this. It would be a happy wonderment for me if the people writing these rules and regulations, not to mention the laws themselves, put half as much thinking into what they were doing as we do in out responses.

It doesn’t sound that my letter was as good as yours…but I did work on it, really, and tried to make a coherent and cogent argument. (my emphasis was on the damage done to lives and real families).

In any case, well done, Sir.

Best Wishes,James I

Very smart. It is important to point out key things but also be concise. I did similar to this. Not certified though.

same here, right after the Zoom meeting by Janice and Chance. They made excellent points and very informative and helpful. I hope we can email, write and call additional times

Thank you, Fred, Ed and Daniel for making calls, sending emails and mailing letters. With the addition of your voices, we will be heard!

This is the only way, no pub hearing, not allowed in, so Raise those pens, keyboards and Voices, GO JANICE!!! Tell Another RC! make sure your family submit, GO. This IS SERIOUS for T-3 at risk for more punishment CONTINUAL, EVERY quarter, NO MATTER HOW LONG AGO you offended.

I’ve gotten my dad, my brother, my sister in law, my girlfriend, her parents and sibs, and other supporters of mine to make noise.

Merrick Garland is a member of the American Law Institute.

⭐⭐⭐ Maybe we can convince AG Garland to abandon SORNA altoghether and, instead, adopt the proposed Model Penal Code reforms (which are headed to full ALI approval next month.) ⭐⭐⭐

I will certainly write to him and suggest exactly those actions!! 👍🏻


He couldn’t adopt those standards because he can’t change what the legislature created and his job is to do what the legislature intended.

Generally what he can change is anything related to retroactive application and the information required to be collected beyond what the legislature required. So what he could do is as much as he is allowed to do consistent with the legislative intent and the spirit of what the ALI intended.

Thank you, MC. Quite right.
I will encourage AG Garland to abandon any changes to SORNA.
And I will contact my legislators to encourage them to accept, advance, and implement all of ALI’s MPC. 👍🏻

Unfortunately the MPC from the ALI only provides advice to Congress and the various legislatures. It has no force of law. Although the 2019 Supreme Court’s Gundy decision was a narrow split decision regarding the non-delegation clause, it allows the AG to assume tremendous latitude in how to interpret, implement and enforce SORNA. I wouldn’t be quite so sanguine regarding precisely what the DOJ can and cannot regulate. These people are “tricksey hobbits.”

This is precisely why this ACSOL campaign to encourage the AG to reject the proposed rules is so critical! Even if your interpretation of his authority is correct, it will take years to fight it in the courts, with no certainty as to how the Supreme Court will rule. Meanwhile, registrants, their spouses and children will suffer under the proposed rules if implemented.

Make the call! Write the email! Send the letter! Anyone who has time to comment in this BLOG has time to write the AG.


@Ed C,

I’m not sure I understand this response as it seems you are kind of saying the same thing I was except that I didn’t explain that the ALI only provides advice as I wasn’t going into depth about that piece of it.

What I was getting at is that the AG can really only change what was delegated to him to change. What is actually meant to be delegated is a matter of interpretation that I was not addressing. What I was saying essentially is that the AG can do whatever he wants to when it doesn’t affect what is not delegated. In other words, the AG can not eliminate the registry but he can be asked to use his delegation powers to, for example eliminate retroactive application for everybody (on the federal level at least) as that was a clearly delegated power in AWA/SORNA.

Absolutely everyone should write a letter to the AG to reject the proposed rules I already have. I’m not sure that it isn’t a bad idea to also ask for more or at least imply that eliminating all retroactive application would be consistent with the ALI recommendation (since apparently he is a member) by mentioning the ALI recommendations and that therefore it would be a good idea to actually scale back rather than tighten SORNA where this delegated power would allow.

@M C and Ed C

As I know, the AG was delegated powers to put things in place via the Fed Register with Congressional approval to implement. If I am thinking about it correctly, using the delegation powers he has from Congress, then can he not take back every Fed Register implementation of SORNA related items that was not passed into law via Congress but was reviewed and allowed to stand by them? Should those not be asked to be taken back at this point while also objecting to the current proposed items? It would seem to me that would be the best correspondence.

MC, I apologize if I misinterpreted your post. We are indeed on the same page. What I was trying to express was that the AG can implement any regulations he choses until the Supreme Court or Congress intervenes. We can’t relax and assume otherwise.

After cases like Gundy and Smith v Doe, LE tends to run as if those decisions gave them a blank check. This afternoon I scanned the heavyweight dissent in Gundy (only a plurality decision) and Alito’s concurrence. Those very directly questioned a broad interpretation of Congress’ ability to delegate to executive branch agencies. Since that decision, the complexion of the Court has changed, so there may be hope yet in the courts. But that is a sloooow process.


That is actually good news. One of the points in my letter referenced the new MPC section regarding sex offenses and registration. The rules were promulgated by the Barr Justice Department before the June 8, 2021 ALI meeting. Now that I know he is a member, I’m glad I mentioned the MPC.


Hey Mr. AG Garland:

[Moderators reminder that raw URLs should not be posted in comments, use the link icon to attach URLs to words]


Last edited 19 days ago by David

Moderator… the guidelines say “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.”

Do we follow the guidelines or you?
[Reply from Moderator: Both are the same. Highlight a normal word or a few normal words in your post, then click on the link icon link, then put the full URL in the little box. Do not use shortened or obfuscated URLs in the little box. After posting and approval, placing the mouse pointer on the normal words should reveal the full URL (depending on browser, might be in lower left hand corner in Google Chrome browser)]

Last edited 18 days ago by webmaster

Wouldn’t this be the lever to return to SCOTUS in contrast to their original finding that the requirements for registration were just slightly inconveniencing?

Very good article today. Merrick Garland is not caving to the wishes of politicians and he’s not playing politics right now. He is being described as still having his Judge mentality and being impartial.

I’m hoping he continues this and does NOT cave in to Sorna Regulations. They said he is one of the only that’s taking the time to read case law. That leads to believe that he doesn’t just pass something if he hasn’t yet read it.

Folks one u thing u have to realize is that by being a former judge, he knows the constitution well and probably knows the games these politicians are playing.


Thank you George, for passing on this very important information!

One thing that has been on my mind frequently is, If we had our felony reduced to a misdemeanor, will SORNA see it as a felony or a misdemeanor?, And, will we be required to register under SORNA, once California becomes FULLY compliant? So do we have to wait until full compliance before we have to register under SORNA?

Last edited 16 days ago by CA
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x