ACT NOW: The Safe Shelters Act: Unsafe, Unjust, and Cruel

By Sandy Rozek, NARSOL Communications Director & John Dawe, NARSOL Marketing Director
When families face emergencies and are driven from their homes, they need quick and equitable access to emergency facilities. Families should be allowed to stay together during crises. However, a new bill, The Safe Shelters Act, proposed by Nancy Mace, a former South Carolina state representative who is now a U.S. congresswoman, seeks to deny this fundamental right to families with a member on a state sex offense registry. “Women and children deserve safety,“ she has said in defense of the bill. While protecting vulnerable populations is a goal we all share, this bill fails to achieve that and instead imposes unnecessary harm.

About the Safe Shelters Act

Mace’s legislation, the Safe Shelters Act, states: “Except for the purpose of seeking information on designated shelters, a covered sex offender may not enter or use the services of an undesignated shelter.”

Under the proposed bill, “designated shelters,” as determined by FEMA, would likely include federal buildings or prisons deemed suitable for registrants by the General Services Administration. This bill is cruel and unfairly targets registrants with families, particularly those with small children. Non-registered spouses depend on their partners for help and support during emergencies, and registered single parents would be made to choose between their children’s safety and forced separation. We believe that requiring families to separate during a crisis is contemptible.

Why We Oppose the Safe Shelters Act

People on the registry already face ostracization and discrimination in daily life. Denying them access to emergency shelters further marginalizes them and interferes with the fundamental unit of society—the family. No family should have to endure such treatment during a crisis.

This bill is unnecessary as there is no evidence that registrants pose a threat to the safety of others in emergency shelters. Shelter operators and agencies are not advocating for such extreme measures. Instead, this bill appears to be a political maneuver—either for publicity or personal agenda—addressing a problem that does not exist.

Ironically, the bill comes from lawmakers who champion limiting government and federal interference in state matters. This legislation contradicts those principles by overstepping states’ rights, a fundamental conservative value. The Safe Shelters Act undermines this principle because local governments typically manage emergency shelters, and some states have chosen to legislate these matters themselves. The bill overrides state and local authority, imposing unnecessary federal control.

This is bad public policy on all fronts, as it harms families by forcing separation during emergencies. It addresses a problem that does not exist, wasting legislative resources. Finally, it violates states’ rights and local jurisdiction over shelter management.

The Safe Shelters Act Places Families at Direct Risk of Harm

The National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws monitors such legislation and recently called attention to problems around these kinds of laws in states like Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina during recent Hurricanes Helene and Milton, stating, “When safety is threatened, when families are driven from their homes, they need to be allowed emergency shelter just like every other citizen, and they need to be allowed to stay together as families.” NARSOL noted several families electing to stay home during mandatory evacuations rather than separating parents from children, putting entire families in danger.

This flawed, unnecessary, and potentially unconstitutional legislation must not become law. Instead of dividing families during crises, policymakers should focus on solutions that equitably support all citizens.

A Call to Take Action

Citizens concerned about this bad policy are encouraged to take action at The NARSOL Action Center.

The following signers have endorsed this opinion-editorial:

Sandy Rozek

Written by 

Sandy, a NARSOL board member, is communications director for NARSOL, editor-in-chief of the Digest, and a writer for the Digest and the NARSOL website. Additionally, she participates in updating and managing the website and assisting with a variety of organizational tasks.

Related Posts

Share your thoughts

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

  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Comments must be at least 10 and no longer than 200 words. We will not post lengthy comments.
  • Please keep the tone and language of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic, both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Refrain from political statements in (dis)favor of all political parties and their representatives.
  • Refrain from comments containing references to religion unless it clearly relates to the post being commented on.
  • Do not post in all caps.
  • We will generally not allow links; the moderator may consider the value of a link.
  • Please do not go into details about your story; post these on our Tales from the Registry.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites.
  • Please do not solicit funds.
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure to Register (FTR), the first time you use it, please spell it out.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them. It will not be displayed on the site.