Source: ACSOL A total of 43 organizations, including ACSOL and NARSOL, have reached an agreement regarding a letter to be sent this week to Chief Justice John Roberts of the U.S. Supreme Court. The letter criticizes the court for its decision, Smith v. Doe, that has negatively and significantly impacted the lives of those required to register as well as their families. The list of significant adverse effects listed in the letter include unemployment or underemployment, limited housing opportunities, denied entry into homeless shelters and prohibited from being buried in…
Read MoreTag: Doe vs Smith
How the Supreme Court Spread a False Statistic About Sex Offenders
When a false idea gains traction, spreading far and wide, it’s always interesting to try to trace it back to its source to figure out what caused it to catch on in the first place. The New York Times has an NY Times: Dubious Data Belies Supreme Court’s Stance on Repeat Sex Offenders, and it pertains to a common myth about sex offenders: that they have extremely high recidivism rates relative to other types of criminals. Full Article Related NY Times: Dubious Data Belies Supreme Court’s Stance on Repeat Sex…
Read MoreWas the trigger point for John Roberts’ appointment based upon Smith v Doe?
One of the most influential appointments in the history of the United states has turned out to be John Roberts, Chief Justice and Price Club Manager of the United States Supreme Court. I am in the process of researching how judicial appointments were made in the United States, including both the historical records as well as political gamesmanship in making those selections. Full Editorial on sosen.org
Read More‘Frightening and High’: The Frightening Sloppiness of the High Court’s Sex Crime Statistics
This brief essay reveals that the sources relied upon by the Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe, a heavily cited constitutional decision on sex offender registries, in fact provide no support at all for the facts about sex offender re-offense rates that the Court treats as central to its constitutional conclusions. This misreading of the social science was abetted in part by the Solicitor General’s misrepresentations in the amicus brief it filed in this case. The false “facts” stated in the opinion have since been relied upon repeatedly by other…
Read MoreOK: Sex Offender Law Successful Challenge Sets Stage for Other Jurisdictions
Recent decisions have relied on the reasoning of the US Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe when analyzing challenges to sex offender registry laws. The Smith decision notoriously held that Alaska’s sex offender registry did not violate the US Constitution’s prohibition on ex post facto laws. The US Supreme Court held that the Alaska registry was constitutional by applying a two-step analysis: first, determining whether the legislation was intended to have a punitive effect and if so, analyzing the results of the “intents-effects” test established by the court in Kentucky vs. Mendoza-Martinez. The Oklahoma Supreme Court…
Read More