The dates have been set for the third annual vigil in Washington, D.C., during which the U.S. Supreme Court will be educated about the significant harm they have caused. The source of that harm is the Court’s decision, Smith v. Doe, which falsely stated that the requirement to register is not punishment and therefore every level of government can pass news laws and apply them retroactively.
The vigil will begin with an informal meet and greet on Saturday, March 1, at 4 p.m. at the Holiday Inn near Reagan National Airport. The hotel is located at 2650 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia. The vigil will continue with a one-day conference on Sunday, March 2, from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the same hotel. The highlight of the vigil will be a peaceful protest outside the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, March 3, at 11 a.m. to about 1 p.m.
The one-day conference on Sunday, March 2, will include free coffee, tea, water and soft drinks throughout the day. Lunch will also be available to conference attendees that day at no cost.
The cost to attend the conference for early birds is $25 and it is possible to sign up here for that conference. Conference scholarships will be available upon request. Conference speakers and workshops will be identified soon.
I’m a senior disabled citizen or I would be there. The registry does absolutely nothing for which it was created. It’s simply further punishment towards those who have already paid for the supposed crime. Many on the registry are innocent yet never given the opportunity to prove it. Lawyers will bankrupt you before they will help you and the judges and courts are fully corrupt by prosecutors who must win in order to become law partners. I’m hoping for success in removing the registry.
i had a close relative run for a Federal Office. During the campaign his opponent used my picture from the [registry] web site and my DL. My offense was 26 years ago and I served 5 years probation. No offenses since that time but with the … registry, people think it just happened. There is a freshman Congressman in 2025 that
will stoop as low as necessary to win.
THIS IS Truely C H A N G E coming to possibly fruition, HOW E X C I T I N G !
[ i.e., educating SCOTUS and the public]
I plan on attending. How long does the vigil on Monday typically last? I ask because I am trying to determine if I fly back home Monday night or Tuesday morning.
Search Labs | AI Overview
Learn more
Yes, a law that infringes on the rights of individuals can be considered a form of punishment, particularly when it significantly restricts liberties or imposes penalties without a clear justification, as this essentially deprives individuals of their inherent rights, which aligns with the concept of punishment.
Key points to consider:
Example:
Does a law that imposes restrictions on an individual considered a form of punishment?
Answer:
Yes, a law that infringes on the rights of individuals can be considered a form of punishment, particularly when it significantly restricts liberties or imposes penalties without a clear justification, as this essentially deprives individuals of their inherent rights, which aligns with the concept of punishment.
Key points to consider:
Example:
I am unable to attend, unfortunately. Years ago, Psychology Today printed an article which stated that [people convicted of a sex offense] will repeat the offense and could not be rehabilitated. Although this article was later retracted by the author, it seems that the original statement is still believed as all [People Forced to Register] are treated similarly. Peoples’ lives are ruined: where to live, difficulty getting jobs, etc. What a terrible way to treat human beings, especially those whose records have been clean for many years.
We have to remember that SCOTUS stated the the registry was statutory due to the fact that registrants were irredeemable due to a “frightening and high” recidivism rate of 80%, which we now know is a blatant lie.
Can you imagine employing this tactic on any other group with a 3.0-3.5% recidivism rate?!
SCOTUS needs to understand the context of their intent. They painted us monsters who cannot be rehabilitated. And they thought its citizens and legislators would never abuse such an open ended program that has no checks and balances. Good thing the dissenting judges did denote how catastrophic the registry could evolve. We should use their words to show those who were pro registry were full of hubris.
Will you be negotiating a group rate with the hotel?