Nebraska Supreme Court rules adjudicated juveniles must register

Viewing 3 reply threads
  • Author
    • #46727 Reply
      Larry Neely
      Larry Neely

      By Larry . . . This is a rather fascinating situation because it illustrates the chaos that can occur when two different courts interpret the same sta
      [See the full post at: Nebraska Supreme Court rules adjudicated juveniles must register]

    • #46732 Reply

      This case simply illustrates the byzantine nature of sex offense and registration laws in the United States. When the Congress initiated registration, it left the details to the states, which have widely varying and conflicting requirements. It is nearly impossible for a registered citizen (RC) to understand all, potentially painful, nuances. Apparently even the courts can’t agree. How could an RC be expected to? This is the only genre of crime I am aware of where a citizen’s mere presence can lead to criminal liability.

      An RC’s only viable options are to hunker down and never travel, or to preemptively register wherever one goes. Either option represents an undue burden on the RC. I wonder if there is not some legal principle, akin to “void for vagueness” or an “as applied” argument, that could be used as the basis for a class action lawsuit against the government; the stated intent of which would be to homogenize registration laws across the country,

      I realize the ultimate goal is to eliminate registration, and that this would only be an incremental step. However, such a lawsuit would raise the issue’s profile, and stimulate public awareness. This would be a vehicle with which to undo ignorance of many issues involving sex offenses.

      Any lawyers out there with creative ideas?

    • #46756 Reply
      Timothy DA Lawver

      The plain electronic indenturing regime is a state right recognized in the Doe cases. Alaska tho was used by Mr. Roberts in ex post review and test in Smith V , was in fact immediately rejected by Alaska’s own Supreme Court itself namely portions of the Wetterling act in OMINBUS94 and passed initially at state level. He used creative consolidation of the cases, Alaska’s case was deceptively unique from the other 49! He has to go.

      If a state can indenture man to machine’s upkeep a vastly more powerful FED can go how far?? Far enough to eavesdrop on your emails, gather metadata, and maintain two party security. Private firms truly free ride the market, and are the bigger problem.
      Schmeeeer! schmeeeeer! schmeeer! said the corporal, what merry men are weee?
      The courts follow their leadership by definition. To impede states USE OF A DATABASE impacts the federal Surveillance Saints. We will all be heading more about that soon. Prepare for DON2.0.

      Two years and counting in Michigan. Opt for trial.

    • #46757 Reply
      Timothy DA Lawver

      @the bench was used to redefine marriage! FUBAR!

Viewing 3 reply threads
Reply To: Nebraska Supreme Court rules adjudicated juveniles must register
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points provided that they stay on topic - keeping in mind...

  • *You must be 18 or older to comment.
  • *You must check the "I am not a robot" box and follow the recaptcha instructions.
  • *Your submission must be approved by a NARSOL moderator.
  • *Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • *Comments arguing about political or religious preferences will be deleted.
  • *Excessively long replies will be rejected, without explanation.
  • *Be polite and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • *Do not post in ALL CAPS.
  • *Stay on topic.
  • *Do not post contact information for yourself or another person.
  • *Please enter a name that does not contain links to other websites.

Your information:

<a href="" title="" rel="" target=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <pre class=""> <em> <strong> <del datetime="" cite=""> <ins datetime="" cite=""> <ul> <ol start=""> <li> <img src="" border="" alt="" height="" width="">