Conference Call re. Michigan AG Dana Nessel Amicus Briefs (2/13)

Admin

Women Against Registry – Have Questions?

We have received many questions since notifying our members of the amicus briefs filed in the Michigan Supreme Court by new Attorney General Dana Nessel in Michigan v Snyder (Case number 153696) and People v Betts (Case number 148981), arguing that Michigan’s sex offender registration and notification requirements are punishment because they are so burdensome and fail to distinguish between dangerous offenders and those who are not a threat to the community.

In response to the appeals for answers we have invited Guy Hamilton-Smith to be available on a conference call on Wednesday, February 13th at 8 PM (ET) – 7 PM (CT) – 6 PM (AZ) and 5 PM (PT) to help everyone understand the scope of the briefs.

Guy is a Legal Fellow at the Sex Offense Litigation and Policy Resource Center at Mitchell Hamline School of Law and is considered an expert on SORA.

Plan to join us on the call to ask your questions and invite others.

Conference Line: 641-715-3580

Code: 859950#

WAR National Directors

AG Dana Nessel Does The Unthinkable – Argues The Truth About SORA (Commentary by Guy Hamilton-Smith)

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. 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.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. 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.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. 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.
  23. 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.  
 

3 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I think this case is one we all need to watch closely…

0
Reply

Thank you for doing this. I found it to be helpful.

0
Reply

Janice,

Will you offer a synopsis of the conference call?
I believe in her courage to stand against the tide, but no Byrne case to grease the path for her.
Michigan Congress displays acutely the onerous nature inherent from the beginnings in OMNIBUS94. IMO, just the ” something else afoot” expressed in the 9ths review. Stevens I think.

0
Reply