Reply To: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court



I was reading through the SNYDER VS DOE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF Because I can’t seem to find The Munis Brief. From what I read SCOTUS knows what’s happening. This is a small portion.
The court of appeals posited that “recent empirical studies” have cast “significant doubt” on this Court’s acknowledgement in Smith that “[t]he risk of recidi- vism posed by sex offenders is frightening and high.” Pet. App. 24a (quoting Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84, 103 (2003)). The court noted studies purporting to show that sex offenders are “actually less likely to recidivate than other sorts of criminals,” and evidence that “of- fense-based public registration has, at best, no impact on recidivism” and may “actually increase the risk of recidivism[.]” Pet. App. 24a. In other words, the court thought that offense-based registration may harm public safety more than it helps. Indeed, the court as- serted that no record evidence suggested that SORA’s burdens are “counterbalanced by any positive effects,” id. 25a (emphasis added)—not even one. Under this reasoning, all offense-based SORA laws—including the federal SORNA—are in the cross-hairs, not just Michigan’s.