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

terry brunson

@ Chuck

Hey- Did you get to go to SCOTUS docket section to see that Freed Cert was Docketed 13 Oct 2017 and a response requirement of November 16th 2017

Chuck I was so supersized to see a demand response so quick
It seem to me that the SCOTUS is not going to give Freed a chance to be heard. . . I see the hand writing on the wall for the PSP and AG of Pa. Pa to STOP the fight against the Law they are to be up holding.

MUNIZ has taken the wind of of the PSP the AG and not the 90 days the PASC gave for a legislative fix is over and they came up with no fix because, it cannot reach back to cover people that MUNIZ helps. . . . . .

Any New Megan’s Laws would have to always meet MUNIZ – retroactive application denials.

The Pa. legislatures are not up for no fix. . . . . . They too business dealing with some new tax code in Pa.

Chuck you are right about taking time to see the dust clear on the MUNIZ decision. It is settling now. There was a duel stay put on MUNIZ 90 days for State to come up with a legislative fix – (They never met to figure it out) and that Stay was only to be in effect until 19 October 2017 0 No Pa. court was to accept any Muniz decision filings until after that date.

Then there is a stay that on the federal issue on Freed’s cert – that stay on federal issue will not stop state claims on mandamus from going forward to the commonwealth Courts of Pa. under R. A. P. rule 741(a)(1) jurisdiction on state rights separate from federal rights on interlocutory appeals. A Cert petition to the SCOTUS is such. . .

I never did understand how state rights give more protection to the people when we have a Supreme Clause in the U.S. Constitution that it is the Law of the Law.