- This topic has 3 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 2 years, 7 months ago by Tim L.
July 16, 2018 at 11:20 am #43561
By Rory Fleming . . . Before soliciting a teenage girl who turned out to be an undercover cop on the internet, Joshua Hoe was director of the Universi
[See the full post at: “The law is not always what is right”]
July 19, 2018 at 5:41 pm #43694
Registrants V terrorists.
Are not registered persons considered domestic terrorists of sorts?
Exactly the correlated interest inherent the governmental uses of databases. Exactly why the Surveillance Saints NEEDED the ruling in Alaska v. Doe. The collateral USE of a database for safety. A group to whom I am familiar, Electronic Frontier Foundation (eff.org) formed to combat and confront their idea that as Jusice Scalia put it, “I would think the United States government should use the DATABASE for whatever it pleases.”
The sex offender made the perfect scapegoat for the perceived need. The ruling flung open the doors to potential unfettered government USE of the device. Just wait and see how facial recognition plays out. Is the road to help paved with good intentions?
July 28, 2018 at 11:02 am #44075
“The law is not always what is right”…
Clearly not, as the well documented SCOTUS cases throughout America’s short history shows (ie, Dred Scott, Plessy vs. Ferguson, Brown vs. Board of Ed – just to name a couple).
SCOTUS has made the wrong decision many times, and later overturned their initial ruling. It will happen in our case too eventually. Smith vs Doe Alaska in 2003 was plain wrong and that SCOTUS decision and its failure to keep the government in check, led to many more unjust laws. It is very much like how their prior decisions led to the old Jim Crow laws.
Based on history, Its somewhat predictable; when the SCOTUS sides with government in cases involving personal liberty, the government will alway legislate even more unjust laws – because government by its nature will always attempt to increase its power over its citizens…until, SCOTUS finally realizes the full practical impact of their prior decision.
Its been 15 years since Smith vs. Doe. Cases around the country are beginning to emerge that offer hope. And many within the public and courts are beginning to question the effectiveness of the registry, its cost, and the impact upon liberty and lives. SCOTUS will ultamately right this wrong.
August 21, 2018 at 11:45 am #45326
Dude you got the makings of sound legal thought here. All three cases u mentioned above are legit fodder ( applicable) to SORNA. In Brown v board the court avoided ruling on the constitutional claim, and decided on other grounds. to paraphrase that court: ‘ The distinction intolerable.’ I’m wondering if you can utilize that phrase and apply it to our situation? Mill it around some in the old reason bucket. The people supporting brown won that case, but how’s their approach different from ours so far? IMHO that is 🔑 to what we must do.