Reply To: Victory in New Jersey: part of Megan’s Law ruled unconstitutional

Tim l

This is the part of the story where the two parties are exposed as the unconscionable parties they truly are. Megan’s law was upheld against ex-post attack based upon an imperative interest. Protecting the welfare of vulnerables , namely kids. Our two parties are placing kids 10 and up on the electronic pillory. So much for the imperitive.

Justice Roberts was the guy defending the distortion in DOE. His ability to turn the question on its head directly led to his appointment to SCOTUS LEADERSHIP.

So much proof of “affirmative disability” has evolved over time that the people’s ” intent” in the first place is obvious. Mr. Scalia stated it himself, only the clearest proof would suffice to override stated intent. Even professional liars get caught up and so they have with use of an electronic pillory.

The most disgusting thing is that society is still faced with sexual assault rates beyond what’s tolerable. Turns out the California rapist and killer was a cop. Is it possible the constitution killers were lawyers?