This made me think of something:
“While still an advocate for missing children—she is chair of NCMEC—Wetterling has become one of the most vocal opponents of sex offender registries.”
This is very similar to child support. When a woman files for child support against the father of the child (children), they cannot later decide they no longer want the child support. I knew a couple who broke up (not a marriage just live in relationship), she went after him got child support, they got back together and moved back in together, but the state REFUSED to stop taking child support payments from him even though they lived in the same house and his income was OBVIOUSLY supporting the household. This was Connecticut. But I’m sure this type of issue applies everywhere.
So the state will jump to the woman’s side when they want child support but when the same woman says “I don’t want it anymore. Leave him alone”, the state says “no”.
Wetterling pushes for these laws and now that the state sees money to be made, they’re ignoring her opposition to the laws she helped push.
Why do states listen when you want to push for something but basically tell you to “kick rocks” when you decide to change your mind?