Source: ACSOL
A court in Pennsylvania decided this week that its state registry laws violate the state’s constitution for two reasons. First, the laws are based upon a false presumption that all registrants have a high risk of reoffending. Second, the laws are punitive.
“This decision by a Pennsylvania court is the clearest statement available to date regarding how registries punish individuals convicted of a sex offense and yet are ineffective at preventing future sexual abuse,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “Although this decision is binding only in Pennsylvania, this decision could serve as a model for other courts to follow.”
In its decision, the Court of Common Pleas found that registration laws in Pennsylvania are based upon a presumption that “all sex offenders, regardless of their personal characteristics and circumstances, have a high risk of reoffending sexually.” The Court then determined that the government’s presumption violated the state constitution’s right to reputation because it “unduly stigmatizes person convicted of sexual offenses.”
The Court also found that the existence of government records, such as a public registry, subjects registrants to negative stigmatization that is a threat to registrants’ reputations. That stigma, in turn, results in difficulty finding housing, employment/education as well as establishing pro-social relationships with others.
The Court further found that the “special stigma associated with the registry requirement is the express accusation in the legislative findings that everyone convicted of a sexual offense presents a ‘high risk’ of sexually offending. This strongly implies that even though one has been convicted and served his or her sentence, one remains a serious threat to society.” The Court also said that it is “this designation, this “scarlet letter of “high risk”, that distinguishes the heightened stigma sexual offenders experience, and hence their greater marginalization….” In addition, the Court declared that the government’s presumption that all registrants post a high risk of re-offending “compounds the isolation and ostracism” experienced by registrants and “sorely diminishes their chances of productively reintegrating into society.”
This decision includes a battle of experts, including Dr. Karl Hanson and Dr. Elizabeth Letourneau, who testified that 80 to 95 percent of all registrants will not reoffend. They also testified that there are more effective means available, such as treatment programs and professional support systems, to accomplish the aim of reducing sexual re-offense.
The Pennsylvania court also decided that the state registry laws were unconstitutional because they are punitive. The Court reminded the state government that “individuals are presumed innocent until they are found guilty by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” The Court went on to rule that the rights of registrants to challenge the state’s registry laws are both “inadequate and illusory.” For example, a person assigned to Tier II must wait 25 years “before the opportunity to ever contest the fact or dangerousness…and is akin to no post-deprivation process at all.”
The Court went on to find that registrants are on “de facto probation for the entirety of their lives, with the regulation, control and sundering of privacy that such statute entails.” The Court also found that the state’s registry laws promote the traditional aims of punishment — retribution and deterrence. Further, the Court found that registration requirements are “comparable to a long probationary tail, an extended period of supervision and government control over one’s personal life which is a component of criminal punishment and, like a sentence, carries a degree of retribution. The difference, of course, is that probationary tails have end dates for compliant offenders.”
Also in its decision, the Court noted that the state’s registry laws waste resources that “could more effectively be applied to reduce the recidivism risk of offenders who are actually at high risk of committing subsequent sex offenses, imposes unnecessary burdens on individuals who are already unlikely to reoffend, and thereby impedes the public safety portion of the purposes of SORNA….”
Download the opinion PDF:
PA-Torsilieri-state SORNA-Opinion-2022
Wonderful decision by the court. This was a well reasoned decision largely due to the expert opinions on ‘our’ side. The expert on ‘their’ side- not so much. Dr. McCleary got his arse handed to him by the court! I wonder if he will ever will be trusted by the Court again.
WOW – and that’s all I have to say about that… 🙂
Because this is a Court of Common Pleas, I bet the state appeals. So until the PA Supreme Court has the final word, don’t yet celebrate. Although this is very good news.
The fact this makes perfect sense, morally and legally it is absurd that it has taken this long for any court to go on record as such. Well done Pennsylvania. Hope it survive inevitable appeal.
If you are relocate to PA to get off the registry, bear in mind your current state where you reside may not take you off the registry. So relocating may or may not make much of a difference in your life, especially if you like to travel domestically or internationally, but could make a difference in other areas.
If I am understanding what Janice stated, even if off the registry, you still have to know the statutes of states you visit to not stay too long and be considered residing and then be put on the registry in that state.
Finally. JOHN FETTERMAN’S STATE FOR THE WIN. ALL WILL BOW BEFORE THE MIGHT OF MONGO. Vote democratic everybody.
I wonder if the ALI had any influence here??? Anyway, does this mean that there are no longer any registrants in PA? Just wondering why no one will raise the fact that SORA/SORNA is used as a trafficking device to extort free services from those forced to register.
I am flabbergasted! Thank God! My only Question is what does it all mean in terms of relief?
This is a wonderful step in the right direction! Let’s keep it up!
Between this and student loan forgiveness, what a day!
🤔
All I can say is “Praise God!!!!!!!!!!”
What is the implication of this for registrants in PA?
This is huge! Praise God!!!
About one million American citizens are labeled, by the United States “government,” as “Registered Sex Offenders.” The same government that’s perpetrated the highest prison population, even more than China’s, Russia’s, and North Korea’s, created the highest citizenry with a “criminal” record—with over one-third of American citizens having a criminal record more severe than traffic infractions—and has anchored millions of people to billions of dollars worth of student loans.
It’s all a House of Cards. A lie we were sold. This is the lie, we were brainwashed into believing, when our schools forced us to recite the Pledge of Allegiance , and recite propaganda.
Unfortunately, with “public safety” laws, like International Megan’s Law, we’re essentially stuck in this Hellhole of a “country,” when people suggest, “If you don’t like it, move!”
It’s all gaslighting, and intellectual dishonesty, at its finest, especially when the whole “sex offender” registry scheme is based off of a bogus “supreme court” decision, Smith v. Doe, peddled by the so-called “chief justice” John Roberts, and propagated by the Mainstream Media.
The “system” is absolutely disgusting. 🤮
Wow, the truth finally acknowledged at a high level.
🤫 Ssshhhhh. 🤫 I think Janice ghost-wrote this ruling for the judge. Don’t tell PA! 🤣
One of many passages in this decision of note is the Court finding that registration requirements are “comparable to a long probationary tail, an extended period of supervision and government control over one’s personal life which is a component of criminal punishment and, like a sentence, carries a degree of retribution. The difference, of course, is that probationary tails have end dates for compliant offenders.” Isn’t it interesting that probation has an end date, but registration does not, for many people required to register.
This was actually a judiciary that thinks. However, the primary issue is that the registry is a Federal creation. So how many years would it take for all 50 states to challenge the registry? More years than I have left to live. The registry needs to be destroyed at the Federal level. But at least this ruling might be the spark that burns down the registry forest.
I’m confused by PA’s tiers. They have 15, 25, and life but don’t state when the clock starts ticking? From conviction? From release? Anyone know?
The sad thing is this is just common sense. You cant make laws to this degree and not expect them to be extra punishment, unless youre willingly ignoring the constitution. Truthfully states have the Supreme court to blame for this since they all but cosigned allowing feel good laws to begin with to make people happy, instead of sticking to the constitution. If its appealed and overturned, then you know it will never change in that state (or anywhere) unless some type of revolution in the government itself takes place to force laws, police, and goverment to how theyre supposed to be.
You know nobody likes to be reproved. Yes we all make mistakes and yes sex is a sin or who told you where naked.. Some Dobbie Gillis Thinker statue… Seems Pennsylvania has a jump on all states combined as this sex registry or internet sting ordeal is nothing more than presumption. Add a bit of adjudication or agitation and it becomes a sex scheme of punitive measures to inflict on others.
Going against the constitution yes it is. Going against the Commandments yes it is. While these sting sting operations live stigma’s they seem to compound more in the life of the people caught up in all this such as ruin reputation, job discrimination, housing, and many more obstacles, Not to mention financial burden, court appearances and other endeavors. True justice is not conning another whether it be in public, over the phone, or by some computer device.
So hopefully someone will use this decision, Marbury V. Madison, and the ALI revisions, at the hearing on the 12th, to stop the government from trafficking people… (as far as this registry goes)
Nice !
Well Janice their you have it in a nutshell. All the ABA and the advocates have to do is sell this. Although its already sold in this Pennsylvania ruling. And yes Pennsylvania is a Quaker State and you don’t want to mess with them. Course I made a decision when I got involved with all this but the detective looked at me and said decision, choice whats the difference.
That’s like a computer and a typewriter whats the difference? I’m sure someone knows the difference. One could go with an ice box and a smokehouse but lets not get carried away.