Proposed AWA amended regulations more significant after new Sixth Circuit court decsision

Revised and reposted 8/31/20

By Larry, Brenda, and Sandy . . . The new Adam Walsh Act amended regulations are out for comment for 60 days, and after the comment period will likely be adopted, finalized, and published in the Federal Register. NARSOL had posted an article stating there is reason for concern but not reason for panic. We removed that post because we are now more concerned due to a recent decision just handed down by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, Willman v. Attorney General of United States, 19-2405 (FED6). This decision will potentially have broad ramifications for those in Michigan and all the states in the Sixth Circuit.

Background on The Adam Walsh Act

Even though the Adam Walsh Act (AWA) was enacted more than 14 years ago, there is massive confusion as to whether or not Congress created a federal registry. We hear this regularly, and even the courts do not seem to understand that there is no federal registry. There is a search engine operated by the federal government that looks into the state registries, but that in and of itself is not a registry. Beyond that, it is very debatable if the federal government can create a federal registry for those convicted of violating only state laws. If you read through the 93 pages in the proposal, the Attorney General (AG) acknowledges that, and they’ve acknowledged that ever since the passage of the AWA. This is precisely the reason federal strategy has been to strongly encourage the states to enhance their registries. The feds have provided enhanced federal funding for those states that substantially comply, and they have used the threat of potentially losing 10% of Byrne federal grants to encourage the states to come on board.

NARSOL recognizes that there could be a federal registry for people who have federal convictions. That registry would involve anything that’s a federal crime. Major crimes occurring in Native American territories end up in federal court, as do military convictions, and for those there could conceivably be a federal registry. Such a registry would be separate from the state registries because there is no federal jurisdictional hook that could force a person with a state conviction to report to a federal registrar. Crimes occur when laws of specific states are broken, and each specific state must determine if any of those crimes trigger a requirement to register. Each state creates its own registry. A federal registry operating side by side with a state registry would be duplication of effort, and there would be no reason for one.

FEDERAL JURISDICTION

Even though there are a significant number of people prosecuted for violation of federal SORNA, that doesn’t translate to there being an actual federal sexual offense registry. In the 14 years since the AWA became law, the feds have regularly asserted their jurisdiction to prosecute whenever there is a somewhat clear jurisdictional hook. This would include those who relocate from one jurisdiction to another or those who choose to travel internationally because there is a federal requirement of at least 21 days’ notice in advance of any international travel. They have claimed federal jurisdiction under the commerce clause of the United States Constitution. The theory is when a registered person crosses jurisdictional boundaries, he/she has engaged in “interstate commerce.” Even under those circumstances, the federal law only requires that you register with the state’s officials if you are relocating, and there is really no method in place to report the international travel if the state has not included that in their laws or regulations. There is no federal registrar to provide information to.

A Danger in the Proposed Regulations

Despite popular myth that the majority of states have rejected the AWA, in reality a majority of the states have been unable to “substantially implement” the AWA despite their desire to do so. There is some commonality among the non-compliant states even though the law enforcement apparatus has touted the benefits of AWA compliance. First, juvenile justice advocates have successfully convinced legislatures that registering juvenile offenders is bad public policy. Second, the AWA has a significant number of pieces that a state must implement to be deemed “substantially compliant.” Several have been denied due to missing some key components that are essential to achieving that coveted designation. Those states are eagerly wishing to be AWA compliant and will seize this new gift from AG Barr.

The AG’s proposal opens the door for the states to become federally compliant without adopting all of the provisions through their legislative processes. A state can simply do it with a blanket amendment to their existing law that a person must comply with all federal registration requirements. For example, rather than a state proscribing how long a person has to register in state law, they could totally eliminate their state reference to how long a person registers and say instead that the person must register consistent with the terms of registration established by the federal AWA. They could state that your reporting frequency will be consistent with the standards required by federal law. In some rare instances, this could benefit the offender because some states require more frequent reporting than actually recommended by the AWA.

The real danger is that legislatures could simply bow out of the legislating business and say that they’re adopting the federal standards. If a state moves that type of proposal through its legislative process, then all of a sudden, de facto, you will have the Adam Walsh Act adopted without your elected officials actually determining and assigning tiering levels. Due to the complexity of figuring out the suggested AWA tiering, most states have gotten it wrong. They often over-tier, and the feds are not going to demand that those over-compliant states reduce their obligations.

This proposal does not create a new jurisdiction for the feds unless the state wants it to. If the state has strong advocates that beat back such changes, it won’t change one iota of what is in that state’s laws. But NARSOL’s fear is that states will gladly allow the feds to help them achieve AWA compliance. An example would be the 21-day advance notice of international travel which is required by federal law. If your state has not included that in its requirements, there is no federal registrar to file the travel plan with, which means you cannot comply. This limits the feds in their desire to prosecute those who fail to comply. Even before the AG’s proposal, the state of West Virginia figured a way to implement this. They sent letters to all registrants in the state and demanded that they come in and sign an acknowledgement of the federal requirement. Most voluntarily signed despite the fact that the law of West Virginia does not require such notice. Now that they have signed, failure to file the required notice of travel can be successfully prosecuted in West Virginia.

This new proposal acknowledges that SORNA provides minimum national standards for sex offender registration, establishing a floor rather than a ceiling for registration programs in states and other jurisdictions. States are free to impose registration requirements binding under their own laws, independent of federal SORNA, including not having a registry at all. Jurisdictions are free to adopt more stringent or extensive registration requirements than those set forth by SORNA. States impose residency restrictions, proximity restrictions, exclusion from school activities, Halloween restrictions – none of these are required by AWA. At one point, the proposed regulations state that this change will make it easier for registrants to determine what they are required to do and thus facilitate compliance. They recognize that you still can’t force the state to do what it’s not going to do, but this does give the states an easy way to do something that victims’ advocates and law enforcement apparatuses will encourage them to do.

Can the Feds Arrest and Prosecute You?

 As we stated earlier, the answer is yes, and they have prosecuted many over the previous 14 years. Although NARSOL has long held the position that the feds do not have jurisdiction to prosecute those who never cross jurisdictional boundaries, we must now rethink that position in view of the decision just released in the case of Willman v. Attorney General of United States. This decision held that there is an independent federal obligation to register. Even though the decision is appalling and legally incorrect in our opinion, it does have the potential to undo the magnificent Does v. Snyder decision rendered in the same court back in 2016. NARSOL will be reporting more on that case and recommending a course of action once we have completed our analysis. The Registry Matters podcast spent a significant amount of time discussing the case, and you can listen or read the episode 142 transcript, being posted shortly at https://www.registrymatters.co/.

 

Help us reach more people by Sharing or Liking this post.

Larry Neely

Larry serves as NARSOL'S treasurer, publisher of the Digest, and co-chair of the conference planning committee. He also hosts the "NARSOL in Action" and "Can They Do That?" webinars and is a regular on the "Registry Matters" podcasts.

Viewing 63 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #75944 Reply
      Avatar
      Steve

      I am not so certain on this portion above…
      “That being said, if you were to violate, only the state could arrest you. State officials will need to know the federal guidelines if they are passed in the state legislature. A sheriff or state trooper could arrest someone in violation, but in our opinion no one with the federal government has that authority because you would not have violated federal law because there is no federal registry with which to register.”

      21 DAY International Travel Notice- In late 2019 registrants in WV were asked/forced to sign a new requirement to notify authorities 21 days in advance of any international travel plans.The acknowledgement states the following:
      “If I intend to travel outside the United States(includes: land, air or cruises), I must report to the State Police detachment in the county I reside in or the detachment that covers county or residency to complete a Federal Travel form 21 days prior to the date of travel. I must bring a copy of the travel itinerary and passport to complete the required paperwork.”
      This requirement is not a state law, but included in the Federal SORNA International Megan’s Law(IML) from 2016. The intent of the requirement is to supposedly reduce international trafficking by registrants. Trafficking is bringing minors and others into the USA for sex trafficking. Of course there is no evidence of registrants doing this, but once again registrants are an easy target to hit. The caveat is the feds cannot prosecute anyone under IML unless registrants are aware of the federal requirement. Once you sign the state provided acknowledgement fair notice has been accomplished. If you try to go international without a 21 day notice you can be prosecuted federally, but not in WV. And the penalty for not giving advance notice is ten years in the federal slammer.

      Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in the rule explains the condition for liability under 18 U.S.C. 2250(a)-(b) that the defendant “knowingly” fail to comply with a SORNA requirement. The “knowingly” limitation ensures that sex offenders are not held liable under section 2250 for violations of registration requirements they did not know about. However, this does not require knowledge that the requirement is imposed by SORNA. State sex offenders, for example, are likely to be instructed in the registration process regarding many of the registration requirements appearing in SORNA, which are widely paralleled in state registration laws, such as the need to report changes in residence, employment, internet identifiers, and vehicle information; the need to report intended international travel; and the need to appear periodically to update and verify registration information. The acknowledgment forms obtained from sex offenders in registration often provide a means of establishing their knowledge of the registration requirements in later prosecutions for violations. See 76 FR at 1634-35, 1638. But sex offenders may not be informed that the registration requirements they are subject to are imposed by a particular Federal law, SORNA. This does not impugn the fairness or propriety of holding sex offenders liable under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for knowingly violating a registration requirement that is in fact imposed by SORNA, so long as they are aware of an obligation from some source to comply with the requirement. See, e.g., United States v. Elkins, 683 F.3d 1039, 1050 (9th Cir. 2012); United States v. Whaley, 577 F.3d 254, 261-62 (5th Cir. 2009). Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) makes these points about 18 U.S.C. 2250’s knowledge requirement in the rule.

    • #75954 Reply
      Avatar
      T & S

      Federal guidelines are just that, guidelines. They don’t have to be followed, and until the feds take this thing from the state, will be inconsistent and garbage. For example, keeping dead people, people in jails or prison on the list, is just plain stupid. Also while their are guidelines, local city, county rules, and state laws, leaves a lot of confusion in the law. While all this stupid stuff is going on, federal laws are clear, any ambiguity or conflicts in the current laws, the benefit of the doubt must go to the defendant. This means anyone facing a conviction, conflicting laws, rules, or guidelines, can be used as a lawful defense.

      For example, anyone who ever got a conviction in California, just for being at the beach, can argue, the State Constitution guarantees that right to go to the beach. Period! See the case of California vs Vinod Khosla, using the California Coastal Act. Federal Appellate Court rule it was a state constitutional right. I think a lot of people could be freed if that was their only “offense”. (Since 1976)

      If you can find it, then of course, you should ask your attorney about this.

    • #75949 Reply
      Avatar
      James Dahler

      How will this affect those of us that have been taken off of the registry in states such as Maryland?

    • #75975 Reply
      Avatar
      Maestro

      “…or face funding loss”.

      Yeah… umm… that’s called BRIBERY! And a GOOD attorney would make that very clear.

    • #75978 Reply
      Avatar
      Jim Coghill

      It’s all stupid. Stupid rules and laws come from stupid people and that’s what we have become.

    • #75981 Reply
      Avatar
      Ed

      As long as the MSM has a dog to chase and blame for all the sexual misgivings and happenings in our world, the people’s minds can be turned away from the political wolves who are actually perpetrating and socially involved with this hidden tragedy of trafficking children. Not a conspiracy now. It’s been a huge business for years.
      All us who have to bow down to the Walsh law are in fact the smoke screen for the elite! Scapegoats.

    • #76022 Reply
      Avatar
      Jason (Felons Aid Alliance)

      These court cases convolute the laws and make compliance harder. A total examination needs to be done and an alliance of legal teams needs to convene to begin working cases that can help fix this. A unity of all registrants and their advocates needs to be formed quickly before further damage is done. Make no mistake decisions like this will start to be more common if we dont fight back.

    • #76019 Reply
      Avatar
      Brian

      States don’t have the time, money, resources, etc. to search the country for past registered offenders.

    • #75985 Reply
      Avatar
      Douglas Martinez

      I knew this was coming. Doe v Snyder was too good to be true. They just effectively circumvented that case. What a load of croc. So you get off the state registry but the federal government then steps in and says you are se sex offender so now you register with us?! How is that not double jeopardy and violation of ex post facto and due process? Every judge that came to that decision needs to be debenched. ANd from the same court that ruled on Doe v Snyder. What a let down.

    • #76015 Reply
      Avatar
      Carl

      Will these changes affect people in PA who were convicted pre SORNA? I am currently on my last year of a 10 year registration requirement thanks to the Munez (I think that’s how you spell it) decision. I kind of figured they would find a way to get everyone back on a registry before I saw any light at the end of the tunnel!

    • #76014 Reply
      Avatar
      Barbara McClamma

      While the discussion will continue as to the ramifications of AWA and the related impacts, what are some directions that can be taken to get fundamental change. As i understand it,and please correct me if I am wrong, changes are made in Congress. How might we concentrate further on accomplishing this goal of abandoning SORNA all together and developing programs that allow for diversionary programs, risk assessment strengthening and specified treatment programs for various offenses. So many treatment programs are ineffective and not in accordance with ATSA standards. The present system of one size fits all is so ineffective and we know it doesn’t accomplish what it purports to do, keep the public safe. ( Not saying anything we don’t know already!!!) Forgive my “dreaming” but we should consider increased efforts in a more concentrated focus . Please accept appreciation for all who are working so diligently in the multiple activist organizations! I belong to five and try to work within each but am increasingly feeling disjointed in the work.

    • #76011 Reply
      Avatar
      Nancy Leon

      After reading this, I still cannot figure out what legal authority, allowed my son who was convicted of injuring a young girl in China and has committed no similar offense in any state in the United States and thus has no criminal record in United States, can be held on the registry in the United States and the State of Texas.

    • #76008 Reply
      Avatar
      TS

      @Maestro, et al,

      Read about the National Minimum Drinking Age Act discussion on state’s losing % of fed funding of transportation money if they did not comply (Wikipedia has a blurb on it under history) just as is being discussed with these proposed new guidelines. Bribery is such a dirty term…incentive is more suited according to the WDC suits. Wolf in sheep’s clothing…

    • #76007 Reply
      Avatar
      A Mistake They Made

      Wow more bad news! I wish i would have gotten into computers more as a kid. For at least 2-3 decades we have had a enormous amount of internet hackers running scams, making viruses, breaking into government computers causing trouble. I am very surprised and, very disappointed that one of these guys has not gotten on the registry and fought back with a major attack on the registry. I wish a hacker would erase these A######s !! They would be a hero to at least 800,000 people. Is it illegal for a mob of people to access a search on a certain web site all at once causing it to crash? All someone would have to do is make a program to automatically access a states registry and do a name search like for john Doe and keep doing it every day. Then pass this program out to all who wish to say NO MORE! If everyone ran this program the registries could not function. Of course the said hacker would have to make a anti-reCAPTCHA to make it effective for a longer period.

      Disclaimer– This is just a hypothetical exercise and not meant to encourage anyone to break any laws

      🙂

    • #76006 Reply
      Avatar
      Lovecraft

      Based on the recent 10th circuit Millard ruling along with possible impacts to Snyder maybe it is time for a showdown SCOTUS style.

    • #76002 Reply
      Avatar
      Tim in WI

      NO FEDERAL REGISTRY?
      whether there is, or isn’t a fed sex offender registry is irrelevant. The point is the federal CONGRESS made law compelling ALL 50 state’s to act ( make law)!

      NATURALLY the people of each state sovereign had to buy in or face a % loss of Fed. Byrne Grant funds. States sure enough, by their own volition, and presumably for their own self interest, begun to indenture the already convicted humans to a new electronic machine property known euphemistically as “registries.” Is there a difference between having a database of convicted felons and enslaving those same felons to database’s maintenance upkeep? Yes.

      For me, this fact elevates the notion of sex offender registration from a “civil rights” issue ( That which is provided to the people by gov) to a ” human rights” issue. (That which is provided humans by the creator).

      As Asimov put it, “machine value outweighs human value” Mathematics – MV > HV.= null (standard output). Naturally no humanity will survive such an unnatural disposition.

    • #76000 Reply
      Avatar
      Perry

      It figures that the Feds would have to throw yet, another regulation of some sort into this mix of pure MESS. All they want is to further complicate and frustrate Our Lives, because it makes them look good-particularly in an Election Year mind you-and furthermore, it keeps them out of Scrutiny from the general public as a whole. Now at some point, all of this distraction has to end and then the spotlight shifts from Us, back to THEM! I’ll Pray for them, because The God I serve, commands me to do so. They’re still The Authority in that I don’t have to like their Deeds, but I still have to Love them because HE created them too.
      Done.

    • #75999 Reply
      Avatar
      Brandon

      I have an idea for the feds: get rid of SORNA!!!

      Epstein got a sweetheart deal from Florida; which nobody would of gotten. He still engaged in the activities that sent him to prison and government turned a blind eye. Supposedly he killed himself, but why would a high profile case like his not be watched often. I know the government is corrupt, incompetent, greedy, and filled with politicians that engaged with Epstein’s ring. Why else would they be obsessed with sex?

    • #75987 Reply
      Avatar
      Tim

      Well damn…what is the cutoff tier for income so they just ignore me?

    • #75988 Reply
      Avatar
      Paul

      My biggest concern now is with the regastrey being public and all the Far-Right and far-Left nutjobs with guns out there how long before these vigilantes start to go hunting us. The hatetred for everything seems to be in play and no leaders are helping they just poor gasoline on the fire

    • #75989 Reply
      Avatar
      Jim

      This country ( and the WHOLE WORLD) has made it very clear that humans rights don’t matter. Now the only people who are trying to gain their rights back are the Black Rights Matter Movement. Why is it that the ONLY way to try to sustain your rights is to loot, pillage and riot to get your point across???? The answer to that, is the Villain’s and Criminals running this country and the rest of the world who are not representing the people any more. They ONLY represent their own opinion, No Matter How bad and Who their self gratification affects any one. No regards to Nothing but Forcing their own addenda for a hopeful reelection to drain more money from the people whom they take pride in running down. They simply refuse to listen to anything or anyone wrong or right. Talk about being totally stuck between a rock and a hard spot! Sex Offenders are just stuck in a rock, No Way Out……….

    • #75993 Reply
      Avatar
      Former Offenderre

      Steve,

      I have not be required to sign anything, but I’ve been out of the country for 16 years. Until they passed IML things were just fine. IML has made my life a living hell. When I returned to my adopted country, the United States had notified them of my convictions which caused me to have to go through a long discussion with immigration here. Fortunately they let me keep my long-term visa, but I was panicking that they’d kick me out. I can’t say as much for my passport which expires next spring and when it is renewed will have the “S” on it preventing me from traveling anywhere. What a great 50th birthday present!

      Starting a few months I literally took the law into my own hands by hiring a lawyer back home to get me off the registration and relieved of the IML requirements. It is not cheap or simple. Thus far I have had to go to the local police department and the US Embassy to get documents. My lawyer says I will have to do a polygraph exam as well as a psychological interview. I am only hoping I can finish all of this before my passport is up for renewal.

    • #75998 Reply
      Avatar
      Loyd Jenkins

      The international travel (21 day notice) is interesting because some registrant’s jobs don’t allow for such lengthy, advanced notice. At best they can get a week. So how does our gov’t factor that in?

    • #75997 Reply
      Avatar
      Anthony

      Check out the citizens commission of human rights.

    • #75995 Reply
      Avatar
      Anthony

      On October 24, 1945, in the aftermath of World War II, the United Nations came into being as an intergovernmental organization, with the purpose of saving future generations from the devastation of international conflict.

      United Nations representatives from all regions of the world
      formally adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948.
      United Nations representatives from all regions of the world formally adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948.
      The Charter of the United Nations established six principal bodies, including the General Assembly, the Security Council, the International Court of Justice, and in relation to human rights, an Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

      The UN Charter empowered ECOSOC to establish “commissions in economic and social fields and for the promotion of human rights….” One of these was the United Nations Human Rights Commission, which, under the chairmanship of Eleanor Roosevelt, saw to the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

      The Declaration was drafted by representatives of all regions of the world and encompassed all legal traditions. Formally adopted by the United Nations on December 10, 1948, it is the most universal human rights document in existence, delineating the thirty fundamental rights that form the basis for a democratic society.

      Following this historic act, the Assembly called upon all Member Countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and “to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories.”

      Today, the Declaration is a living document that has been accepted as a contract between a government and its people throughout the world. According to the Guinness Book of World Records, it is the most translated document in the world.

    • #76056 Reply
      Avatar
      H n H

      To Tim and Anthony, I see an issue being brought up on human rights on an international level. I brought this up on another thread but it was deleted, why, I don’t know, but someone please look into the individual on you tube that posts under “common sense laws”. That right there is a case that deals directly with SORNA and specifically the registry requirements in Florida and how they impact nationwide.

    • #76055 Reply
      Avatar
      Tod Lay

      I hate that at 61 I already feel like I’m in a race between death and more stringent registry requirements. So far, having to carry the baggage of every man, women and child in the state that has committed a sex crime, I’ve managed to still make a living. But I have no tomorrow as long as I’m on the registry. Let me just die in peace.

    • #76054 Reply
      Avatar
      Steven Peterson

      I guess Bill Barr isn’t busy enough busting Antifa and other violent protesters, along with Swamp Rats spying on the Presidential campaign, and other and sundry criminals running amok in our streets and halls of government. No, there are so many good people out there that he runs out of things to do, and that means he’s just got to go after those terrible RSOs who after all are not punished sufficiently under neo-Nazi State laws. Forget about the drunk drivers, arsonists, murderers, assaulters, and other violent offenders who have no proper registry, not to mention the idealogues running media, schools, and institutions shutting down free speech and spreading lies and misinformation, and all the other Fascists busily creating a dystopia out of our former Constitutional Republic. Why not put the entire population in lockdown and make them wear masks and take a mandatory vaccine for a disease that kills less than 0.1 percent of it’s victims? Oh wait, they’ve already thought of that, so everyone in society can appreciate what it’s like to live under constant and relentless tyranny. Sorry for the rant, but it just never ends.

    • #76069 Reply
      Avatar
      R.Arens

      Scary stuff indeed, but we have it so bad in Iowa that Federal mumbo jumbo really wouldn’t work us up much.

    • #76070 Reply
      Avatar
      Ed C

      It is time for political action! The article states that these provisions will “likely be adopted.” Let’s not give in to that without a fight. We are in a 60 day comment period. Well, let’s comment. There are nearly a million persons on the registry, plus family members. There are also many advocates and professionals who are educated on the issues. Since the public rarely comments on proposals such as these, a few thousand letters will get their attention, 100,000 would be a landslide. These will remain a part of the public record, which may be useful at some later date.

      I believe NARSOL and other advocacy organizations should prioritize encouraging all their members and readers to sit down and write a letter. For the cost of a postage stamp (email has less effect, but is also useful), we could flood the DOJ with negative responses. NARSOL could contact all relevant organizations, provide DOJ contact information, and post a list of pertinent points and/or draft a letter for its members to copy.

      Commenting in these BLOGS is thought provoking and informative. However, we are simply preaching to the choir.

      Veritas.

    • #76076 Reply
      Avatar
      TS

      @Loyd Jenkins

      There are exceptions to the 21 day advance notice mentioned in the latest proposed regs reference back to the finalized 2011 regs as seen in the Federal Register entry of them. The exceptions are evaluated @ the local level for being accepted or not depending on what the exception being used for short notice travel.

    • #76078 Reply
      Avatar
      WC_TN

      Maestro-

      “…or face funding loss”.

      Yeah… umm… that’s called BRIBERY! And a GOOD attorney would make that very clear.

      Actually, threatening to withhold funding is BLACKMAIL, but this has pretty much always been a standard practice of the Federal government. It’s their way of trampling state’s sovereignty when they really want a federal law or standard to reach into the borders of any given state. They just threaten to cut off their money in a certain area and states can’t wait to march to the federal government’s drumbeat.

    • #76080 Reply
      Avatar
      WC_TN

      There are so many points in this article that expresses the exact dangers Willman v. U.S. Attorney General presents to states within the 6th Circuit. I would like to cut and paste sections of this article as my statement against the adoption of these standards. May I do so? Please answer so I can get my comment submitted. This is what I have picked from the article to use as my submitted statement:

      Despite popular myth that the majority of states have rejected the AWA, in reality a majority of the states have been unable to “substantially implement” the AWA despite their desire to do so. There is some commonality among the non-compliant states even though the law enforcement apparatus has touted the benefits of AWA compliance. First, juvenile justice advocates have successfully convinced legislatures that registering juvenile offenders is bad public policy. Second, the AWA has a significant number of pieces that a state must implement to be deemed “substantially compliant.” Several have been denied due to missing some key components that are essential to achieving that coveted designation. Those states are eagerly wishing to be AWA compliant and will seize this new gift from AG Barr.

      The AG’s proposal opens the door for the states to become federally compliant without adopting all of the provisions through their legislative processes. A state can simply do it with a blanket amendment to their existing law that a person must comply with all federal registration requirements. For example, rather than a state proscribing how long a person has to register in state law, they could totally eliminate their state reference to how long a person registers and say instead that the person must register consistent with the terms of registration established by the federal AWA. They could state that your reporting frequency will be consistent with the standards required by federal law. In some rare instances, this could benefit the offender because some states require more frequent reporting than actually recommended by the AWA.

      The real danger is that legislatures could simply bow out of the legislating business and say that they’re adopting the federal standards. If a state moves that type of proposal through its legislative process, then all of a sudden, de facto, you will have the Adam Walsh Act adopted without your elected officials actually determining and assigning tiering levels. Due to the complexity of figuring out the suggested AWA tiering, most states have gotten it wrong. They often over-tier, and the feds are not going to demand that those over-compliant states reduce their obligations.

      This proposal does not create a new jurisdiction for the feds unless the state wants it to. If the state has strong advocates that beat back such changes, it won’t change one iota of what is in that state’s laws. But My fear is that states will gladly allow the feds to help them achieve AWA compliance. An example would be the 21-day advance notice of international travel which is required by federal law. If your state has not included that in its requirements, there is no federal registrar to file the travel plan with, which means you cannot comply. This limits the feds in their desire to prosecute those who fail to comply. Even before the AG’s proposal, the state of West Virginia figured a way to implement this. They sent letters to all registrants in the state and demanded that they come in and sign an acknowledgement of the federal requirement. Most voluntarily signed despite the fact that the law of West Virginia does not require such notice. Now that they have signed, failure to file the required notice of travel can be successfully prosecuted in West Virginia.

      This new proposal acknowledges that SORNA provides minimum national standards for sex offender registration, establishing a floor rather than a ceiling for registration programs in states and other jurisdictions. States are free to impose registration requirements binding under their own laws, independent of federal SORNA, including not having a registry at all. Jurisdictions are free to adopt more stringent or extensive registration requirements than those set forth by SORNA. States impose residency restrictions, proximity restrictions, exclusion from school activities, Halloween restrictions – none of these are required by AWA. At one point, the proposed regulations state that this change will make it easier for registrants to determine what they are required to do and thus facilitate compliance. They recognize that you still can’t force the state to do what it’s not going to do, but this does give the states an easy way to do something that victims’ advocates and law enforcement apparatuses will encourage them to do.

      It is my firm position that the feds do not AND SHOULD NEVER have jurisdiction to prosecute those who never cross jurisdictional boundaries, which means the Feds should NOT be able to arrest and prosecute anyone at the federal level for violating the terms of a state registry. However, the appalling decision in Willman v. U.S. Attorney General held that there is an independent federal obligation to register. Even though the decision is appalling and legally incorrect, it does have the potential to undo the magnificent Does v. Snyder decision rendered in the same court back in 2016.

      May I use these points from the article as my statement?

    • #76102 Reply
      Avatar
      Bobby

      So I’m confused.
      Were does this leave California that is about to implement a new system for registering so as to shrink it because it is too over-bloated. The people that will be removed or fight to be removed will actually be committing a federal crime if they don’t register?
      And what about all the cases fighting retroactive application in their state that won and were found to be against their states constitution. Are all of these people actually breaking federal law right now by not registering?
      Why wasn’t this clear from the get go that everyone is required to register regardless of state law. Were all these fights and all the money and time spent fighting all these cases a waste?
      Can someone please explain further.
      Thank you.

    • #76104 Reply
      Avatar
      Maestro

      I think it’s a good time for the organizations like NARSOL and FAC to go over AG Barr’s head right to the President.
      It would also be a good thing to throw in Christian values that everyone right down the chain of command keeps saying this country was built on.
      No president really knows anything about what’s going on with the registry and who’s on it that doesn’t need to be. That’s why these people in the presidency have what’s called “advisors”. But of course, when it comes to this topic, advisors are going to mislead him by always associating sexual offenses with what happened to Megan Kanka and Jessica Lunsford. They’re not going to say “oh, btw, Mr President, there are also one time offenders who did something stupid in a lapse of better judgment with a teenager whom they didn’t harm (like Elvis Presley, like John Walsh if he ever crossed states lines with his future wife at the time she was 17), so perhaps we need to take a closer look at why we keep saying ‘once a sex offender always a sex offender’ and perhaps eliminate a few hundred thousand of these people from the registry.”

      Now is a good time to do that before sh*t really hits the fan with laws being made. I was just watching the President on a FB video and AG Barr was right there talking about making laws tougher due to all this rioting and how NYC eliminated cash bail allowing “criminals” to walk the streets. Translation: Thanks to the rioters that these laws are going to be made because of, such laws are going to effect EVERYONE at ALL times in the future. So, if you get into a scuffle at a bar, you’re probably gonna get a $2 billion bail because of fear that if you are allowed to walk out of the police department after your arrest, you’re probably gonna go hold up a bank and kill people.

      AG Barr is no dummy. He knows exactly the ramifications he’s going to cause with being “tough on crime”. Spare me! It’s time the people spoke out.

    • #76107 Reply
      Sandy Rozek
      Sandy Rozek
      Admin

      @ED C: The appropriate forum for what you suggest is the comments option available in the very first link in the piece. Look at the comments there; some are quite lengthy. Everyone needs to go there and express how this will negatively affect their lives.

    • #76110 Reply
      Avatar
      Jenny

      Sex Offender registration needs to be abolished. There is proven to be no evidence that such registry make society safer. All it does is create more discrimination for individuals that have been convicted of said crimes. I have to question as to why there is such a registry for SO but not such a thing for drug/murder offenders. In all actuality, recidivism is higher in these classes of cases. I have always said until the average “jo” is involved in making the decisions on criminal law there will never be legislation that makes any sense. This is our time as family members of SO offenders to share our stories just the same as Adam Walsh’s father did and legislation occurred that has proven not to have a benefit to society. If we do our homework I can guarantee that a majority of Federal cases of Sex offenses involve the internet, making these “victims” never being violated by the one being charged. In addition, this is a lucrative business by all involved (government, victim, victim’s counsel) as money is exchanged through court mandated restitution and any seized items that are confiscated and not evidence are auctioned by our government.

    • #76111 Reply
      Avatar
      Bobby

      Here is my comment to the Federal Register:
      The Government’s boot is on my neck and i can’t breath.
      This is straight up Nazi type crap that the United States Government is engaging in. Some of my relatives escaped the Nazis and some did not, and now i feel persecuted and trapped in a Nazi type regime myself with no chance to escape.
      I have been in the community for over twenty years with not even so much as a parking ticket. There is scientific evidence that shows that i am no more likely to commit another sex offense than any other citizen, so why is it necessary for me to continue to be held down by the United States Nazi boot.
      I keep trying to love this country but this country keeps hating me, and keeps putting me and my family at great danger from vigilantes and nut cases that would like to kill me and my family. This is nothing more than State sponsored doxing, and you can not justify it any longer as these laws were passed and continue to passed and upheld based on false, incorrect, and outright lies that are continually proven so by scientific data and facts. Forcing someone to register for life based on a decades old conviction with no due process or not basing it on scientific data is absolutely cruel, and serves no purpose other than punishment and revenge.
      Please take your boot off my neck and let me breath. Please stop acting like Nazis. You can not make America great again by sponsoring these type of Nazi rules, so please stop thinking like a Nazi and like Hitler used to think.

    • #76113 Reply
      Avatar
      aurelius

      And so the Drumhead trials continue. Remember folks, you’re here forever.

    • #76117 Reply
      Avatar
      Convictim

      We are all convictims because of the registry.

    • #76119 Reply
      Avatar
      Jamba

      I wish there was some way for every registered person to go to Washington DC and register as homeless while camping out in front of the Supreme Court . Let them try to figure out how to register 800,000 homeless people living on the SCOTUS front lawn . And I think if homeless it needs to be done every seven days .
      We would disrupt all the activity in the city at the same time .
      ONLY IF .

    • #76123 Reply
      Avatar
      Clarence Craig

      I agree. Almost 11 years on lifetime parole so far and no end in sight, even though I have had a squeaky clean record the whole time

    • #76149 Reply
      Avatar
      A Mistake They Made

      Jamba,

      The thought of 800,000 people taking a dump on the SCOTUS front lawn brings warm joy to my heart! This is the value of that institution today, or any other court in this land. I am in extreme contempt of them all, and i do it with glee!

    • #76152 Reply
      Avatar
      Jose Torres

      I have the exact same issue in Michigan. Im a registered offender but never charged in the United States. I was charged by the government of Japan while serving as a marine. My case was a politically charged case and was recognized by the naval law journal as such. Meaning the Okinawa governmental officials want U.S. military gone from Okinawa and have taken extreme measures such as turning American service men into criminals.

    • #76154 Reply
      Avatar
      Brandon

      I think it’s time for loved ones of those on the registry to make their voices heard in Washington. How many times can the government keep kicking a person and still call It a civil non punishment? Not every victim wants to stay in victimhood and want to move on with their life. No wonder society has fallen off the rails because no person can think critically anymore. Not all people forced to register are violent, but what the government’s registry causes violence including harm to children they are supposedly “protecting” from the monsters.

    • #76158 Reply
      Avatar
      Cindy Anderson

      My sons charges happened when he was 14 yrs old. The consensual “victim” waited three years to come out so at 17, my son was convicted as an adult. He has been employed everyday since his release from general population prison. Has completely complied since his release. Because he can’t find a place to rent, he lives with us, his parents. We are upper middle class with our house marked for everyone to see. We cannot join the neighborhood community watch because he lives with us. We are constantly being harassed. I have never even been in a police car but I AM ALSO BEING PUNISHED!! President Clinton did more with Monica Lewinski than my son did at 14 years old. Something needs to change! Your SORA has taken years off my life.

    • #76162 Reply
      Avatar
      Mr. Mike

      Hello all,

      Wording of the Sorna by Barr/ AG and federal guidelines of Sorna. The federal Guidelines of Sorna are that, guidelines. They use words like “ would be attractive to an offender to offend….” Thus, in making of these rules and guidelines. It’s Speculation with no proven numbers of actual cases to justify making statements, rules and subsections. Please keep this in mind when commenting.

      It’s based on “speculation” and not facts. Such as travel, Possibly re-offending, living location and etc..
      Keep in mind also that the stated registration period runs ( Or when clock actually starts ticking) is upon your release date from incarceration, NOT your conviction date.

      I suggest everyone comment in writing and email.But also carefully read the proposed AWA requirements before commenting and cite the subsection ( to direct them to) when basing your concern or they become a little confused and though they file your comment, it won’t be considered if they are confused.

      There is a lot of messed up/ and mis-claused wording in this proposal that Narsol and ACLU can use to gain ground. And you can use it to your advantage as well in commenting. So read carefully and take notes. Some which no doubt will open the doors for future litigation’s.

      The concerning part here is that the 6th circuit court has opened the door for the state to just adopt the AWA act. There’s still time for the state to tweek the proposal. It’s going to take some powerful wording by advocates and laywers as well comments by us to change a few details.

      The registry is not going away, it will be there, regardless. The key here is to emphasis on a route off the registry. Lifetime is a bit of an overkill for many. Senseless with no merits.

      The Sorna in itself It is intended to establish a floor rather than a ceiling for the registration programs of states and other jurisdictions, It is merely Federal guidelines to which each state can prescribe registration requirements binding on sex offenders under their own laws independent of SORNA, including not having a registry at all. However Jurisdictions accordingly are free to adopt more stringent or extensive registration requirements for sex offenders than those set forth in this part, including more stringent or extensive requirements regarding where, when, and how long sex offenders must register, what information they must provide, and what they must do to keep their registrations current.

      My personal tip, and I’m saying this as a former Business Law Attorney. DO NOT complain in your comments or point fingers. Acknowledge your actions and responsibility, how the laws have affected you without pointing or complaining. They will begin to show compassion. They won’t if it’s all written as a complaint.

      Compromise, yes compromise. What does this mean? You come half way they’ll come half way.
      In other words don’t say ” I don’t deserve to be on registry blah blah blah…” or what ever the excuse. They don’t want to hear that. Their response will be ” tough, you committed crime, suck it up” That’s the honest truth. Instead, Focus attention on getting a route off registry, such as incentive to lower your tier over time,
      clean record, individual risk assessment to prove your not a risk to re offend. Age relation to the registry, in other words, your age makes you no longer a threat. Thus lower tier or time on registry. Which offers to change tiers. Surprising high number of people are tier 3. There needs to be a route off that. And again, that involves a compromise. Point out facts, and back it up. We need to stand strong, we need to compromise, because we have been fighting to get rid of registry, I’m afraid that won’t ever happen. Instead we need a way to get off, not subject to 25 yrs to life. I know a couple offenders approaching 80, they don’t even know where they live or who they are half the time. A Threat? I think not.

      My point people is to have hope here, something is better than nothing, and right now we are facing nothing. We need to change course of action and compromise.

      Thanks

      Mr. Mike

    • #76171 Reply
      Avatar
      Lisa

      The Sex Offender registration needs to be abolished for all internet based cyber crimes. There is no evidence that the registry makes society safer. The registry creates more discrimination for individuals that have been convicted of these crimes. Why would society have a registry for SO for clicking computers in the name of safety but nothing for drug dealers or murders or violent offenders. Statistics and data show, recidivism is higher in these classes of convictions. Registry legislation makes no common sense but only in the sense of profiting from the poor and working class. As family members of SO our pain, our trauma, our financial and emotional toll should be heard and considered in effective legislation. Sex offender legislation has proven not to have a benefit to society. Rather, it has negatively impacted society with denial of the most basic human rights from living conditions, jobs and daily physical safety. Reports prove that a majority of Federal cases of Sex offenses involve the internet, making these “victims” never being actually violated by the one being charged, but the viewing if another’s past crime. In addition, these convictions have become a lucrative business by all involved (government, victim, victim’s counsel) as money is exchanged through court mandated restitution, seized items that are confiscated and not evidence are auctioned by our government. Add in the millions in our for-profit prisons, phones, commissary, fund transfers, probation office, monitoring software, and the list goes on and on. The Registry is unconstitutional and citizens who have already paid their debt to society need to be given their rights.

    • #76187 Reply
      Avatar
      Mr. Mike

      I wanted to point out again The wording of the AWA proposal. There is a lot of wording within that CAN be challenged by ACLU, NARSOL, and lawyers.

      But before I point this out, Let’s look at the attorney general behind the implication of this act. Signed into law back in 1992-3 by then acting president. Barr has been around since then, and if you really do research on Barr, you’ll find that more times than not, he creates “public confusion” within critical aspects of law and reports. A person that took nearly 2 million in hush money in the Time Warner anti-trust merger to look the other way. This is the same person that believes that the marches for police abuse is a joke. And see’s nothing wrong with police using “Rambo” style tactics to take down an unarmed man. And doesn’t believe the police did anything wrong by Kneeling/sitting on a guys neck for 8 minutes till he died. The same person that is influencing Judge Cleland in the 6th supreme court ruling recently with AWA. This is a very big conflict of interest here.

      This is a bit disturbing as Judge Cleland is a very strict believer in the constitution. So this is not making since to me.

      The Adam walsh Act ( AWA) has been around since the 2006. States did the bare minimum, others added to it, take Florida for example. Very strict. However the wording between Original AWA and this new AWA is much different and tweaked here and there. For example, ….

      In the original AWA, tier III offenders had to register from 25 years to Life ( see 42 USC 16915 ) . This leaves the door wide open here for interpretation. As it can mean any number of year from 25 to life. Leaving jurisdictions with control over you to make that decision just how long. The new version of AWA removed the 25 yrs and just put life. So hopefully ACLU and NARSOL along with attorneys will catch this and challenge this. Because the door is open here for review and discussion of this.

      Again read through both AWA and take notes, and submit your comments on page before October 13th. Remember, the AWA is a powerful act, but it doesn’t mean it has to be followed. It goes against the constitution. Also note, the Ohio Supreme Court in 2010 ruled that the Adam Walsh Act as enacted in Ohio does not apply retroactively to individuals who committed their crimes prior to its effective date of January 1, 2008.

      Mr. Mike

    • #76194 Reply
      Avatar
      Maestro

      To Bobby, Cindy Anderson and everyone else,

      Not sue if you’re aware of this but there is an option to leave comments. I think there’s only 40 days left for people to leave comments about this before they make a decision. Go there and leave a comment about your experience either as a registrant or someone who knows a registrant and the impact it has on moving on with life productively.

      You do NOT have to be a genius at writing skills. Just proof read and correct any spelling errors, etc. Don’t use fowl language (obviously) and get your voices heard! The more comments against this act, the better the chances of it not going forward.

       

    • #76215 Reply
      Sandy Rozek
      Sandy Rozek
      Admin

      @ Cindy Anderson: Cindy, PLEASE go to https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/08/13/2020-15804/registration-requirements-under-the-sex-offender-registration-and-notification-act and put exactly what you have written here as a comment…except leave out the sentence about President Clinton. Keep the focus totally on your family and what you deal with because your son is a registrant — and due to something he did as a young teenager.

    • #76242 Reply
      Avatar
      A Mistake They Made

      Thanks for the link Sandy I posted this

      First consider this not everyone is guilty of the crime they are convicted. If you are going to pass out lifetime punishments like candy then the same legal standards and absolute proof like murder trials, should be used in sex crime trials.

      Furthermore The constitution States.

      No person shall … be subject for the same offence [sic] to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.

      No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

      No person can be compelled to speech under threat of punishment.

      You are guilty of breaking these laws and 800,000 people know this and their friends and family’s know this too.

      “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation….

      We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness… it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.****”

      Thomas Jefferson-

      DO NOT TREAD ON ME!

      Best Regards

      A Mistake they Made

    • #76267 Reply
      Avatar
      CJB

      Everyone, please read below:

      What needs to done, PRONTO, is to File an Injunction of Temporarily Relief; this would be a great delay tactic, until the Full Measure of the Proposed Changes can be reviewed.

      In addition, the AWA is based on Law that was codified by both Houses of Congress. In all, reality, this LAW has become Agency Law that ‘allows’ for these changes. So, NARSOL, should obtain a Great Constitutional Scholar/Attorney to ‘Slice and Dice this’; It is Unconstitutional to have remanded SORNA to Agency Law!

      In addition, here is the Rule Making Process with regard to changes in the codification of the Federal Registry:
      (please note the 4th one; Congressional Approval!)

      Overview of Rulemaking Process:
      1. Grant of rulemaking authority
      Congress delegates authority directly to agencies
      President may delegate constitutional authority to subordinates
      President or Agency Head may re-delegate authority to subordinates

      2. Proposed Rule stage
      OMB Reviews under E.O. 12866.
      Agencies publish Proposed Rule in FR for public comment

      3. Final Rule stage
      OMB Reviews again under E.O. 12866
      Agencies publish final rule in FR
      responds to comments, amends CFR, sets effective date

      4. Congressional review
      Agencies submit rules to Congress and GAO (could nullify rule)

      5. Effective date
      30 day minimum, 60 days for major rule, no minimum for good cause
      Agency may delay or withdraw rule before it becomes effective

      Submitting Comments, will not do anything; they are allowed per the Federal Registry!

      What needs to be done is to go for the jugular, in order ‘Halt the Process’, as the Process, is unconstitutional: due process, once again, has been violated, amongst other Basic Constitutional Rights

      To Upset this Apple Cart, it will take a team of Constitutional Jurists, to fight this thing and Win; This will allow for these proposed changes to be shelved, pending numerous Federal Law Suits……

      Posting Comments, will not change things! I am sorry to say this, but our comments really will not even made a ‘dent’ to the situation!

      The Truth Hurts and FACTS ARE FACTS!

    • #76270 Reply
      Avatar
      Jerry

      Welcome to modern day Nazi- america seems this would make any plea deal void, I was certainly not made aware that I would have to register for the rest of my life. No land of the free only home to the slave.

    • #76301 Reply
      Avatar
      Bobby

      This is the time for any and all organizations worth their salt to step up and do something immediately!
      CJB is right, comments will do absolutely nothing.
      Can Narsol or anyone else connected please let us know what’s going on and if anything is being done. Are you using all your resources and connections on this?
      What is the plan if any?
      Thank you.

    • #76311 Reply
      Avatar
      Bobby S.

      @Fred, or anyone, who might know an opinion , with this and then the current decision by the 6th 6 Circuit, which kind of condricts its own decision in Does v Snyder in my opinion. So with everything going on right now here in Michigan, and still waiting on Cleland’s Clock to start, how does would or will this effect those of us waiting to be removed from the registry like we were suppose to be, before all this so called Pandemic crap got started. To those that don’t know I was convicted in 6-19-1992, before a registry even existed here in Michigan got out in 94′ and off parole in 96′ . Then I was placed on it for 25 years Wich was up on 6-19-20, that was when my registration start date was 6-19-1995, so I have the 25 years in now, but then it was changed to life time registry, and my registration start date was also changed to 6-19-1992, so according to that, I now have 28 years in , and now with the Does 1 win and Does 2 win, myself and others sit in limbo waiting to be removed from Michigan’s registry, because of a so call pandemic, that put everything on hold. Anyway do these decisions effect us, and are we screwed now, or should we be ok once Judge Cleland gets the ball rolling again. Just looking for some kind of clarity, because and I’m probably wrong these 2 decisions should have any baring on the Does 1 and 2 Cases that have already been decided. I hope all this makes sense to everyone. Thanks in advance.

    • #76314 Reply
      Avatar
      anon

      I do not support these changes.

      I do not want my tax dollars being used for this.

      I am so tired of politicians pushing bad policy.
      Policy that has been proven to not work. And still causes economic harm.

      There is 940,000+ people who are forced to register. Or risk lenghty imprisonment.
      40,000 are added to the registry every year.
      Kids as young as 8 are on the registry.
      People whos crime was not sex relate are on the registry.

      People on the list are having a hard time finding jobs and a place to live.
      And this is because the governments requires this public list.

      The list doesn’t work.
      These changes won’t improve the economy.

    • #76341 Reply
      Avatar
      FinallOffTheReg

      Okay,
      I am goin going to weigh-in with a different take on this

      Now, I simply want to propose a different take on this situation out of the 6th. Moreover, then the “proposed amendments to the AWA. I will keep it short and simple.

      I think that any opportunity to legally challenge anything involving SORNA and the disparate State regimes is good. These regimes on the state level and now on the Federal level are so FUBAR even before, that I feel with this proposal will be ripe for attack in and across all forums from every advocacy group supporting RSO’s. Beyond that, I do think that ANY chance to attack the foundation is an OPPORTUNITY.

      Moreover, I do feel that amongst “our” group of disenfranchised persons and their supporters there exists power advocates that are really legally smart which shall challenge the new proposal in every court at every level.

      However, in the interim “State” RSO’s are validly worried. In addition there is a question. “Can the Fed’s now under this proposal Legally enforce Registration in perpetuity”? If a person off the Reg in one state moves to another state, can that new state enforce a registration even though one has been OFF a registration for years in a prior state? I think that is the frightening question. Okay, well let’s say one has been “Federally” convicted. Thus, as a “Fed” guy, does that then mean I am not part of the proposal?

      Sigh……What a FUBAR. BUT, I think it’s going to be litigated for years. There will be challenges and victories and interim setbacks. But at the end of the day, it gets the discussion into the Courts and I do feel this is wholly important.

      Stay strong folks.

    • #76405 Reply
      Avatar
      Harry Lockhart

      ooops . Just saw the ” Do not Post Links” proviso. Sorry. Can Narsol publish? Noise may help…??

      MODERATORS NOTE: There is a link to provide comments on the SORNA revisions contained in the article posted on the NARSOL website entitled: “Proposed AWA amended regulations more significant after new Sixth Circuit court decision.

    • #76437 Reply
      Avatar
      Scott Dawson

      Something has to be done. This has ruined opportunities not just in my life but others as well for a stupid mistake we made as a teenager. Being labeled as something I dont beleive in has taking a number on me emotionally and mentally. I got 2 step kids and a feionce. Weve gone through alot. And catching charges for non payments. I’ve gotten put in handcuffs in front of my family after getting pulled over by the looks of our car matched someone else ant I was non compliant. I’ve getting months of my life taking away cause of these rules n regulations being on parole and in reality I didnt do sh_t wrong. I was 17 had a 1 night stand. Never thought that choice would ruin my life completely. Something needs to be done

    • #76555 Reply
      Avatar
      aurelius

      Nothing will be done. More dog and pony shows, that’s it. Using our taxpayer money to do it no less. Short of -Every-Single-One-Of-Us- marching(or rioting, seeing as how those people seem to be getting their way) or Mass Suicide, -Nothing- will be done. All those who would naysay me one this, ask yourself: Will things get better? Have they really gotten better in the 25 plus years of this inhumanity? 100 plus years? 500? Answer honestly, do you really think things will change in your lifetime? Your children’s? Children’s Children’s? Change will NOT happen in the courtroom. It will NOT change no matter WHO you VOTE IN, or VOTE OUT.

      Mark these words, for those of you who refuse to face the reality of the situation will most likely be trod upon by the system the most. Wake up.

    • #76584 Reply
      Avatar
      H n H

      Aurelius, I agree 100%.The only thing that sickens me more are the Bible thumpers that think God or Jesus loves them so much that all this is gonna go away. Lol.. An act of Congress is what got us here and the riots all over the country with BLM only give it more fuel for the fire. This hatred will NEVER end until we wake up as a society and realize that everyone has a sexual capacity. That isn’t to say I condone pedophilia, but rather that to criminalize every aspect of every single thing even remotely sexual from the age of puberty on till 18 is just wrong and goes against God’s design for humans to begin with. Why doesn’t Congress just hand out chastity belts with a key given upon the stroke of midnight on the teens 18th birthday? Any violations thereof can bring about more sex offenders! Heck, we could outlaw masturbation and have all the teens turn each other in for having any sexual thoughts at all beings according to the legislators they are incapable of anything sexual until society allows them to just get “switched on” at 0001 hours on their 18th birthday.

      I deal with an individual at work that says I’m a pedo for my conviction regarding a 16yr old teen I never touched or took pictures of, or even seen naked or encouraged anything sexual to. But, I’m on the SO hitlist and he loves to spout off that I stop at all the schools and f**k little kids. Hatred is such an easy emotion and one that has deep reprocussions. We see the hatred in the BLM riots, why does anyone seriously think anything short of going into congress and blowing one’s brains out all over the legislators will ever change anything? For the hatred they have fostered, I’m shocked it hasn’t happened yet. Think “the final speach of Budd Dwyer”…. That kind of shock is the only thing that would get these clowns attention cause apparently situations like Christine Moody don’t amount to a hill of beans to them. But a nipple is fair grounds for all this mess…. It disgusts me.

    • #76661 Reply
      Avatar
      Edie Billings

      According to what I read, the number of years you must register. according to the Adam Walsh Ac, begins on the day you were convicted, not the day you were released or got off probation.

    • #76673 Reply
      Avatar
      Bobby S.

      @Edie, Correct, I’m in Michigan and my registration start date was changed from 1995 to 1992, my conviction date, so my original 25 years was finished on 6-19-20, if I wasn’t changed to life I would be off the registry right now. Now since Does v Snyder was found to be punishment and unconstitutional, now myself and many others here in Michigan are waiting to be removed from the registry. I for one wish Judge Cleland would say enough is enough and start the clock to have many of us removed from the registry ASAP.

Viewing 63 reply threads
Reply To: How important are the new federal registration proposals?
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points provided that they stay on topic - keeping in mind...

  • *You must be 18 or older to comment.
  • *You must check the "I am not a robot" box and follow the recaptcha instructions.
  • *Your submission must be approved by a NARSOL moderator.
  • *Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • *Comments arguing about political or religious preferences will be deleted.
  • *Excessively long replies will be rejected, without explanation.
  • *Be polite and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • *Do not post in ALL CAPS.
  • *Stay on topic.
  • *Do not post contact information for yourself or another person.
  • *Please enter a name that does not contain links to other websites.

  • *DO NOT POST LINKS TO OTHER WEBSITES
Your information:





<a href="" title="" rel="" target=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <pre class=""> <em> <strong> <del datetime="" cite=""> <ins datetime="" cite=""> <ul> <ol start=""> <li> <img src="" border="" alt="" height="" width="">