Reply To: Sex offender registry sparks Supreme Court debate


Mr. T.
When lawyers start tossing around ambiguous, non laymen, and intellectual terms like “intelligible principle” , ” plausible deniability” , “indeterminate term” and ” intermediate scrutiny” more illegality has already occurred by our constitutional state and federal elected politicians. As in Packingham, rights are inextricably infringed first and corrected later after irreparable harm experienced. A plain argument for a lack of constitutional basis, that is presumed innocence.