Reply To: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court


The commonwealth C’s Neiman case was decided in 2013. What it said was the previous version of Megans Law (Megans Law III) was unconstitutional because the General Assembly combined 3 separate subjects into a single bill. This violates Pa Constutuon article 3 section 3. It wasn’t considered s big deal because the PSP felt they could still enforce the registry with Adam Walsh Act. Due to Commonwealth vs Muniz they cannot retroactively pubish. So now there is no Megans Law to require restoration for those convicted before 12/20/2012.