Reply To: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court

terry brunson

@ Brian

Thank You for being supportive of a hard decision – filing the mandamus – I told you that the Commonwealth had something up their sleeve . . . and it is HB 1952 – it is the birth child of DA Freed. . . .
HB 1952 will have a mountain to climb to become law. It has to pass the PA. Senate’s Review – and it has to denovo pass the PASC decisions on SORNA application on Pre-SORNA RSO’s and pass constitutional muster on Ex Post Facto, Reputation Shaming, equal protection of law by clear due process and appeal rights, and recrimination against SO’s of just being on Megan’s law without having facts of showing SO’s are a danger to the public. And onthen HB 1952 has to go the full Assembly floor to be debated and voted on and then to the Governor’s desk to be signed. . . . . Muniz will be back to them in their face in full force as law in the Commonwealth.

I knew the PSP never wanted to remove names off the megan’s law list; that would have lessen their registry numbers. . . . . .
The PSP filed a Amicus Curiae brief to the SCOTUS and gave their plan away in the brief……. They want to do a case by case review before removal of names. . . . Not making it automatic. PSP want to make Pre-SORNA people phone in their updates – !8,500 phone ins? What government phone system can take that – then they are going to require a regitration fee like a probation fee – if not paid (JAIL TIME THREATS) Many are so trusting to the PSP – I think, but they are not a freiend to RSO’s . . They are not.

It will take a Writ of Mandamus to move the PSP – an early court order from a commonwealth court is just as good as waiting for a remand order from the SCOTUS on Muniz to force the PSP to follow the PASC order as the law demands. A Commonwealth Court mandamus fee is $65, but if you cannot affort that -file a informa papus motion of indigence. Remember the old Law Library visit days? Every University has one and they are good too. . . . . .

The Muniz case is in effect right now on PA state claims…. If you put in your mandamus anything about the U.S. Constitution – your mandamus will be bared or held up by a Federal stay on Muniz because the federal question has not been settled in finality yet.
And about a “Saving Clause” rule on expired Pa. statues of – Megan’s Law 1 , 2, and 3 they were all expired on 12 December 2012 at the SORNA date If they were not they would not need HB 1952. . . . . . . Unconstitutional statues cannot be reverted back to any way. . . . There must be a legislature fix . . . . . The problem is that PA’s fix will have a date of 2017 -2018 and if new law is applied to pre-SORNA people it is Ex Post Facto – and we are right back at Muniz- – – – – – – Muniz cannot be fixed by making a new law to bring back an old law –

Our PASC explained – “a repealing clause expressly repeals a prior statue from effective application of law – where the substitute for the prior statue is itself ineffective where the substitute for the prior statute provided in the repealing statute is unconstitutional and where it does not appear that the legislature would have enacted the repealing clause without providing a substitute for the act repealed [.]”

Simply put, an UNCONTITUTIONAL STATUE cannot repeal a former law and the prior statue remains unenforceable if expired. Accordingly, ML’s 1 -2 & 3 loss all their effectiveness as enforceable law on December 20, 2012 at the implementation of SORNA.

Expired Megan’s Laws had no counterpart “savings clause” provision of a legislature fix – SORNA expired all reverts back to old Megan’s Law’s – it is possible that when Muniz comes back to us in a remand order, you will be removed off the registry completely without any delays of waiting until 2020 or 2021 to get off. You will not revert back to the standards of an old Megan’s law. The law of your registration past is inoperative to revert back to. As a Per-SORNA person – there is no revert Megan’s law to revert back to, that is why the HB 1952 is being pressed now. The Commonwealth understands the cruch that they are in to remove 18,500 people off the registry.

YOU MAY BE IN A BETTER POSITION THAN YOU THINK – I am arguing this in my brief to the Commonwealth Court and they are taking it and asking the PSP to tell them which Megan’s Law of the past to Terry Brunson being held to revert back to. . . . . The PSP has to give the Court an answer to this question. The Court brought this up not me. They did it on their own motion. I hope that you understand my fight is better than MUNIZ – He gets you back to 10 year – but my argument IF I WIN -will get you off the registry Now. . .Smile your friend terry brunson