So, Ms. Devoy, what else is new? I think pretty much that state legislatures have had a big red bulls eye on registrants for the past 20 years, or at least since the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Dred Scott v Sandford (1857), no I mean Plessy v Ferguson (1896) oh I’m sorry, uhh, it’s Smith v Doe (2003). I get these cases confused because all three cases basically do the same thing—take away the Constitutional Rights of US citizens. But what do I know? In Smith the court said that: BANISHMENT, DISENFRANCHISEMENT, STIGMATIZATION, EMASCULATION, as a result of being on a state’s sex offender (SO) registry is not PUNISHMENT. Oh and don’t forget that registration/residency (RR) laws do not violate the constitutional ban on Ex Post Facto (when applied AFTER a person’s conviction and sentence) and RR laws do not violate Due Process, i.e., that the state does not have to give you notice or allow for an opportunity to be heard or confront your accuser. They hold the position that SOs pose a unique threat to the community; however, murderers, robbers, burglars, car thieves, home invaders, drug dealers are good to go—in other words, we don’t mind these types of criminals to be loose in the community with no one knowing where they are. Go figure. but anyway, what do I know.