WI: Gov. Tony Evers signs law requiring more sex offenders to be placed on registry for life

Source: jsonline.com 4/2/24

MADISON – Wisconsinites convicted of multiple counts of a sex offense will be required to register as sex offenders for life even if the counts were part of the same incident, under a bill signed by Gov. Tony Evers.

The law effectively nullifies a 2023 state Supreme Court ruling holding that multiple convictions stemming from the same criminal complaint do not necessarily classify someone as a repeat offender. The governor’s signature brings resolution to a question officials have debated for years.

In a 4-3 decision, the court ruled in May 2023 that “the plain and ordinary meaning of ‘separate occasions’ does not refer solely to the number of convictions” in consideration of whether lifetime registration is required for an offender.

“It is undisputable that all sex offenses covered by the sex offender registration statutory scheme are heinous in nature, thus necessitating the use of the registry for the protection of the public. However, within that scheme, the legislature, not this court, made policy decisions regarding which offenders are categorically required to comply with registration requirements for life and which are required to comply for 15 years,” Justice Jill Karofsky wrote in the majority decision.repeat

Read the full article


Related posts

Notify of

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 and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. 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.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. 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.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. 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.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. 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.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. 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.
  22. 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

We must all be vigilant and watch what bad bills are being proposed in our individual states, then be willing to show up, stand up, and speak up. Otherwise, terrible bills like this one become laws.

How to look up bills in your state:

And just as important is each of us monitoring anti-registrant proposals by our local counties and cities by getting on the email lists. We need to show up to their public board meetings when necessary to speak out against bad proposals. Spouses can explain how the bad proposals
hurt their family and children. Organizations like ACSOL can’t possibly monitor every city and county.

Here’s hoping the ex-post facto retroactive aspect is taken to court in a challenge with an injunction against it. Doesn’t matter if it’s non-punitive, the principle is still against the constitution.

“It is undisputable that all sex offenses covered by the sex offense registration statutory scheme are heinous in nature, thus necessitating the use of the registry for the protection of the public. However…..”

Before they get to the ‘however’ part, they always have to preface their statement with some get tough sh*t like “all sex offenses covered by the sex offense registration statutory scheme are heinous in nature.” Why don’t these judges just accept that they did the right thing in ruling against these monkeys in the DOC, who wrongly interpreted the statue. Reminding people how horrible sex offenses are is nothing but unnecessary theatrics

I might have missed it, but does failure to register qualify as a separate sex offense under this law? If so, this could be construed as cruel and unusual punishment.

Well, so much for the new Democrat party being for the down trodden or the disenfranchised. All they do is virtue signal for votes. If the crimes are so heinous and the people are such a risk then maybe they shouldn’t be releasing them, but then on the other hand CP was on tier three (life on the registry) until ACSOL got that adjusted,so what a politician says is heinous might be nothing more than fear mongering as election approach.

I’ll be long dead before any of this circus comes to a close. Until then I am socially dead. George Carlin was right. “Rights” is a made up concept. You only have the rights “they” say you can have. It’s that big red, white, and blue dildo they keep shoving up our a*s everyday.

Let me see, 5 counts of possession stemming from one incident. Prosecutors always charge the maximum number of counts possible, even if not reasonable. These are used as leverage to extract a plea. It is easy for a prosecutor to get a plea for 2 or more counts. I don’t know what constitutes a count of possession in WI, but in some states each picture could count as a separate charge. In others, it might be the number of storage devices. How the term “separate occasions” could mean anything other than actual separate occasions is beyond me.

It is also quite likely that this new law will make defendants more reluctant to accept a plea. The prospect of lifetime registration and GPS monitoring is added incentive to risk trial. There is no public good that will come from this obviously politically motivated law; but this is an election year after all.

“It is undisputable that all sex offenses covered by the sex offense registration statutory scheme are heinous in nature”

in case you needed any more evidence that all these registry laws are punishment out of spite, hate and fear mongering.

Regardless of anything else, I think this law has more to do with getting bigger registry grants from the feds than anything else.

If they believe sexual crimes are all heinous in nature is that why we are all treated like we are we are the worst of the worst. Wisconsin officials must have their heads stuck up a block of some nasty stinky cheese!!

Another Constitutionally Questionable law designed to whip up popularity. This attempt, like many others we seen over the last few years, I suspect are attempts to create popular support not for the registry, but for Populism in general. Populism that is unconstrained by the Judiciary.

In a Populist Nation the sole purpose of a Judicial Review is to justify the Will of the People. To elevate all State claims to the Status of Unquestionable State Truths, and use them as justifications for approval. This establishes the Illusion of Legitimacy that facilitates State actions with plausible deniability of injustice.

Nothing they do can ever be accused of being unjust, because it’s all legal under the law! A classic tactic used by all Populist nations. Nazis used it, as did the Soviets along with all of their puppet States, as has America on numerous occasions.

This is how you create that…Generate huge levels of popular support for various agendas. Get the people to cheer for whatever you say, “Needs to be done!” Then watch it die in the Judiciary. Do that enough times, with sufficiently popular laws… and now things need to be “Fixed” so the Will of the People can reign supreme!

Change the constitution, if possible, or change the Judicial Review process. If you can’t do that, change Judges. Paint the Judiciary into a corner so they always agree, or risk being replaced with someone that will.

That’s not what’s happening? The Registry, a expression of pure Populist demand hiding behind a Judicial Illusion of Legitimacy, isn’t being used to justify changes to our system to establish the Will of the People as Supreme? “It’s legal because We the People say it’s legal!”

There are no Rights in Populism, only Privleges that can be infringed, suspended or Revoked by decree of the Tyranny of the Majority. Judiciary simply rubber stamps their approval on whatever you say. It’s already legal because the People say it’s legal, and the “Review” simply establishes the Illusion of Legitimacy.

But no way anything like that is happening here, or anywhere? It’s all just Election Year Grandstanding? Classic politics.. make promises you can’t keep, then blame others for the failures.

Who do they blame for this failure? The Legislators that passed the Bill, or the Governor that signed it into law? What went wrong…and how do we “Fix that”?

And this is why the registry has to be abolished in its entirety. Too many new laws can be introduced at any given time, and being applied retroactively to the only type of “ex” offenders. They don’t do this to any other group of ex offenders and it screams “discrimination”. It is great that many here in CA are getting off the registry, but who is to know whether in a few years they will be put back on the Hit List with a new draconian law. Plus, for the amount of people who get off, ten more get added. There is no need to pick away at the registry. It has to be abolished!!!

I suspect that this will be back before the Wisconsin Supreme Court before too long. This is essentially a direct attack against a recent court ruling, and I’m sure that some attorney is already prepping the lawsuit for the moment their client is back on the registry and/or back on lifetime GPS.

Just because the legislature changes the definition of sentencing terminology don’t mean it can automatically be applied retroactively, no matter how many attorney generals may have issued opinions previously. AG opinions are not law or the equivalent to a court opinion.

My guess is that in the end this will remain in place but the effective date will be moved to the date of publication, not 2017. That is, if litigants can act fast and get this to the court before the next election turns it conservative again.

“It is undisputable that all sex offenses covered by the sex offender registration statutory scheme are heinous in nature, thus necessitating the use of the registry for the protection of the public.”

Utter balls! Pissing in public heinous in nature? An eighteen year old boy having sex with his seventeen year old girlfriend? A kid sexting pictures of herself to her boyfriend? Indecent exposure? Need I say more?

Not all states have lifetime registration. I was removed in 2011 after 15 years.

I see those idiots are at it again in Wisconsin; it’s such a dysfunctional state that I’m glad I left. I guess those criminals in their legislature couldn’t stand Corey Rector, a lowly black man in prison, filing a lawsuit & kicking the WI DOC in the teeth by freeing 100s (myself included) from lifetime gps. But the good ole boys of the assembly had to come back and get their revenge, while the cowardly Wisconsin governor capitulated to their absurdity. Uncle Tom Kevin Carr has a lot of smooching to catch up on Tony Ever’s pale as. I’m sure those cheeseheads will put me back on lifetime, but it doesn’t matter, since Massachusetts has me registered at the lowest risk with no information made public to the paranoid safety child safety freaks. The folks that run Wisconsin are so dumb. They think I committed such a “heinous” act by having a handful of deleted pictures on my desktop, but car jacking is okay. Also, DA John Chrisholm can suck webbles for not keeping Milwaukee safe by spending his department’s resources on people like me. Wisconsin people on this forum really should think about leaving that state. Anyways, you haters & govt criminals know where to find me. I always use my real name. Peace! Yours always, James Brown

Smell the election-year posturing in the air of Madison, WI….

It took 5/6 months too get a letter from the DOC for removal of GPS monitoring! Friday April 12th less than a month when this pos bill got passed I get a letter back on lifetime GPS… This is sickening that they would pass this bill. Good bye WISCONSIN! 2 Accounts is NOT 2 CASES!!!! Money driven bill…..

That is just flat wrong. Just like the lifetime registration for one-time offenders. Repeat offenders and predators need to be on lifetime registration. Brad schmilas what a joke! Tony Evers I’m sad that you sign this into law I thought highly of you as our governor not so much anymore!

How is it legal what Wisconsin did? They didn’t get their way in the Supreme Court ruling in wi v rector so they promptly just changed the law in question?! This amendment is being used to subvert the authority of the judiciary. Full stop.

From my list of potential legal challenges this amendment should face:

Bad Faith or Abuse of Process: If it can be demonstrated that the state legislature acted in bad faith or abused the legislative process by hastily amending the statute solely to circumvent the Supreme Court’s ruling, it should face challenges on procedural grounds. Courts should review the legislative history and context of the amendment to determine whether it was enacted in good faith.(it wasn’t)Also the statutes initial intent is completely negated by this.