Tabatha, you went to law school so maybe you can answer a question. I am finding court rulings on the internet that are intriguing. This link (http://www.ydr.com/local/ci_26190460/sex-offenders-appealing-stiffer-megans-law-registration) has a case that basically is saying that retroactively lengthening the amount of time a registrant is on the list is a breach of contract. Because the registrant entered into a legal contract when he/she singed their original plea bargain.
It should be obvious from my poor sentence structure that I do not have a good understanding of legal procedure. This is my question: Does this set a legal precedent? Does it mean that it can be quoted and used to change the laws in my state (Texas)?
This link states that registration is punishment, which makes it unconstitutional ( http://sexoffender-decisions.blogspot.nl/search/label/%28%23%20%20Unconstitutional). SORNA’s registration requirements are significantly more stringent than Megan’s Law, Uhler held. Uhler also agreed that the “law is not reasonably designed to fulfill its purported function” and that it constitutes additional punishment.
“This court finds the SORNA provisions pertaining to juveniles are punitive and violate the ex post facto (retroactivity) clauses of the Pennsylvania and United States Constitutions,” Uhler wrote.
It is talking about juveniles but once you admit it constitutes punishment that would seem to make it unconstitutional to anyone as it is ex post facto. Am I correct in my thinking? All along the legislators have been saying that it is a public safety law not a punishment. Once you have officials admitting that it does constitute punishment, you have pulled the thread and the whole thing will fall apart.
Please share your thoughts here on the forum so others can contribute.
Thank you Shawn.