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


From what I have read, there is seven elements one has to put forth in their edit. There are described in the following:
The plaintiff shall set forth in the complaint:

(1) the name and description of the plaintiff and defendant;

(2) the facts upon which plaintiff relies for the relief sought;

(3) the act or duty the defendant is required to perform and the refusal to perform it;

(4) the interest of the plaintiff in the result;

(5) the damages, if any;

(6) the want of any other adequate remedy at law;

(7) a prayer for the entry of a judgment against the defendant commanding that the defendant perform the act or duty required to be performed and for damages, if any, and costs.

As you can seee in number 3 one would have to show how the PSP has refused to comply with the decision in Commonwealth vs Muniz. How can you show that when the section HAS NOT become law yet. The PSP cannot break the law. Untill Pa has exhausted ALL of their Appeals there is NO requirement to remove anyone from anywhere.

I would love to here your thoughts