Reply To: PA’s high court rules retroactive SORNA violates constitution

terry brunson

It is Article (6) not (4) my over sight I will put it in whole: read below –
Thank for adding the Supremacy Clause of Art VI of the U. S. Constitution – which states:

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

The Unities States Constitution is the Supreme Law in the Law – and all State Constitutions and State Laws Contrary to the U. S. Constitution shall be deemed unconstitutional – and all Judges are bound by the U.S. Constitution.

Now please note that there is an Ex Posrt Facto rule in the Federal U.S. Constitution –
Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 (with respect to federal laws) and Article 1, Section 10 (with respect to state laws).

The MUNIZ decision used Federal stands on Ex Post Facto Test and they passed. Just as The 9 Justices of the SCOTUS will use on the issue.

Jurisdiction of lower courts decision are attached to the SCOTUS by request of a review – When accepted jurisdiction attaches before 90 day window closes. A state supreme appeal decision has a 90 day window of U.S. Supreme Court Jurisdiction – – – – on the 91st day that window shuts. . . . . . and the low state supreme court decision stands as Law in that jurisdiction only. . . . . I pray that my intent is gotten across