Reply To: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court

terry brunson

The issue before us who are going to have to challenge ACT 10 is – DUE PROCESS –
ACT 10 violates both procedural and substantive due process.
Procedural due process is the something that must come before a freedom right is taken.
Question? What does ACT 10 take from us?

Right of – NOTICE (Why it applies by facts)

FAIR HEARING before a fact finder
Before the Government can take a right – notice and hearing are necessary to minimums and a must be in procedural – due process.

In the case of ACT 10 – the Government (Pa. Assembly) wrote ACT 10 into Law as a protection of their interest of public safety without explanations on what the dangers are that the public need protections from.
The Government (Pa. Assembly) gives ghost rationalizations about “irrefutable presumptions” about SO’s are dangerous to the public by no supportable, or rational facts consignable to show their clams that they make.
ACT 10 gives no clear procedural steps to inform SO’s about a notice that Act 10 APPLIES nor when a HEARING will be available to rebut and challenge witnesses, and facts presented by fact base analysis to show why ACT 10 is relatable to YOU.
ACT 10 seems to have been written as a knee jerk Law to combat a MUNIZ- decision mass removal of RSO’s on the public as if every single one them is going to re-offend on the public by “recidivism” claims that sound unintelligent. This is a violation of the Pa. Constitution Article 1 Section 1 on:
1. Notice
2. Hearing
Before You can be tar and feathered – you have to have procedural due process notice of a hearing before the tar and feathering begins. That is just procedural due process of notice of a hearing that ACT 10 lacks.