Reply To: In denying Snyder petition, Supreme Court upholds Sixth Circuit ruling


I was not listening to State “officials”, rather than to the ACLU/U of M attornies. Specifically, I had contacted those whom are supposedly trying to help Michigan Sora registrants and was told the new lawsuit had some persons listed as those who would testify, potentially, regarding issues involving claims that affect the majority of issues raised in DOES-V-SNYDER.

However, there is NO claim being raised to obtain relief for permanently and severely disabled persons on any amended registry, nor for a court ruling to modify SORA for disabled persons, not even to force compliance to the State “ADA”, nor the Federal ADA. Such as in-home registry, or online registry, having State Police, etc., officers coming to the home to register them, or means to obtain individual removal from SORA for those who have disabilities where in-person reporting posses an undue hardship (by existing court case definitions) or is impossible. While the State does now allow a person to have someone obtain an expensive Legal Durable Power of Attorney to register for him/her, I do not have anyone available to do so.

Further, unless the present filing has both the proper heading of enclusion of all persons “covered” by DOES-V-SNYDER. and contains proper arguments in the filed lawsuit, the State can again wiggle out of portions of it.

Also, unless this new lawsuit contains a section in the Relief portion for an IMMEDIATE Ruling and IMMEDIATE implementation of any judgment in our favor, this will drag on and on. Because the State can again appeal on up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

So given the absence of any inclusion for Disabled citizens in this new lawsuit, there will be no harm in filing an individual one in Federal Court.

Lastly, will someone give me an online site to view the full new lawsuit? The ACLU declined to do so…what are they hiding?