Reply To: SCOTUS Denies to Hear Muniz


We are now faced with two fights. SORNA caused a a lot of problems when it made everything connected with it retroactive in February 2017. It was a new scheme and should have never been applied to anyone who’s conviction was prior to it’s date of enactment. However, we also have to deal with Smith v. Doe, the SCOTUS decision of 2003 which states that sex offenders info can seen publicly and they can and did make it retroactive.

Even if we win on the SORNA issue with all it’s over-broad craziness, we still have to fight SMITH. The Answer to it all is what recently happened in the Federal Courts in Colorado. The judge dealt with both SORNA for making the draconian laws retroactive but also dealt with the SMITH issue by understanding that due to the way the public treated RC’s, it’s became an unconstitutional issue by letting the public met out punishment. That task is reserved for the states and the federal government, supposedly with oversight. The use of the internet for vigilanty purposes and the stigmatized view given to RSO’s, were not thought of when SMITH was decided in 2003. This case is now on it’s way to the 10th Circuit. I hope they reverse the decision of Judge Matsch. That should set us up for a cert by SCOTUS.