Reply To: SCOTUS Denies to Hear Muniz


You make an excellent point. Perception is reality. I truly believe they combined 1952 with another bill so that it will be struck down. I believe they know in their hearts of hearts that the registry does not make the public safer. The jig is up on that scare tactic. Like has been stated on here before, This is the best of both worlds. They get to say they voted for it, and they get to kill the law at the same time. Giving the fact that Muniz is from the Pa Supreme Court, all the lower courts will have their hands tied. Next, Pa won’t be able to have SCOTUS review HB1952 Court challenge because it will be based on the Pa constitution.
I said 4-6 years before. However, given the fact that Muniz can be used a precedent, we might be able to cut that time down. This is why all these guys are retiring. So when the court rejects the law, they won’t have to make a new one. The new guys can claim, “Hey What can we do. We can’t make a new law because the court took all our tools away!!!
Perfect for all!!!
Just have to get through the next 3-5 years. This is my new estimate.

We have a violation of the single subject rule. We have a violation of the ex-post facto clause. Finally, we have the right to protect our reputation. They can take our reputations away but only with due process. I would argue your criminal trial isn’t the correct due process forum to satisfy their ability to ruin your reputation. They should have to have a separate pre-sentencing hearing, and not that shame one where the SOAB presents a “report”. I refused to talk to them on the grounds it violated my 5th amendment rights. They still gave me tier 1. Whew!!!