<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Mass. Supreme Court strikes down residency laws; Compares them to Japanese internment camps	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/</link>
	<description>National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 May 2023 15:55:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Arnold McMillan		</title>
		<link>https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22911</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arnold McMillan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2016 15:35:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nationalrsol.org/?p=2209#comment-22911</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Florida definitely needs to drastically change its sex offender laws, regulations &#038; policies regarding sex offenders. I&#039;ve moved from Akron Ohio to TN, then to Florida &#038; ran into its &quot;registering&quot; for life. Ohio Supreme Courts changed the landscape by saying that, the AWA was unconstitutional, and those under Megan&#039;s Law will be off the list after 10 years. Just a note...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Florida definitely needs to drastically change its sex offender laws, regulations &amp; policies regarding sex offenders. I&#8217;ve moved from Akron Ohio to TN, then to Florida &amp; ran into its &#8220;registering&#8221; for life. Ohio Supreme Courts changed the landscape by saying that, the AWA was unconstitutional, and those under Megan&#8217;s Law will be off the list after 10 years. Just a note&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Quinn		</title>
		<link>https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22910</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Quinn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2016 23:28:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nationalrsol.org/?p=2209#comment-22910</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22906&quot;&gt;sandy&lt;/a&gt;.

Does anyone know all the states that have passed this law besides Mass?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22906">sandy</a>.</p>
<p>Does anyone know all the states that have passed this law besides Mass?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: rwvnral		</title>
		<link>https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22909</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rwvnral]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2015 15:51:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nationalrsol.org/?p=2209#comment-22909</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22908&quot;&gt;charles&lt;/a&gt;.

RSOL and its affiliates look forward to opportunities to challenge various aspects of registration if and when properly developed cases (based upon strong claims and solid facts) are available.  The Supreme Court accepts very few requests for certiorari (less than  1% of those sought), so it&#039;s imperative to present challenges that have the greatest likelihood of succeeding on their merits.  In Smith v. Doe, the question before the Court was very narrow: Are state-enacted regulatory schemes which publicly disclose the past criminal acts of its citizens constitutional?  The Court answered affirmatively.  Without bringing challenges that overwhelmingly demonstrate the punitive effect of such regulatory schemes, it&#039;s unlikely that the Court will reverse itself.  Nevertheless, it is comforting that the Mass. Supreme Court has gotten it right with regard to residency restrictions.  Still, the hard work is done at the lowest level of a Constitutional challenge where collecting statistical data, gathering affidavits, and supplying a federal judge with well-documented and factually based demonstrations about the harms of registration and residency restrictions have the potential to make their way into the inevitable appellate process.  These are the kinds of cases RSOL is seeking to join.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22908">charles</a>.</p>
<p>RSOL and its affiliates look forward to opportunities to challenge various aspects of registration if and when properly developed cases (based upon strong claims and solid facts) are available.  The Supreme Court accepts very few requests for certiorari (less than  1% of those sought), so it&#8217;s imperative to present challenges that have the greatest likelihood of succeeding on their merits.  In Smith v. Doe, the question before the Court was very narrow: Are state-enacted regulatory schemes which publicly disclose the past criminal acts of its citizens constitutional?  The Court answered affirmatively.  Without bringing challenges that overwhelmingly demonstrate the punitive effect of such regulatory schemes, it&#8217;s unlikely that the Court will reverse itself.  Nevertheless, it is comforting that the Mass. Supreme Court has gotten it right with regard to residency restrictions.  Still, the hard work is done at the lowest level of a Constitutional challenge where collecting statistical data, gathering affidavits, and supplying a federal judge with well-documented and factually based demonstrations about the harms of registration and residency restrictions have the potential to make their way into the inevitable appellate process.  These are the kinds of cases RSOL is seeking to join.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: charles		</title>
		<link>https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22908</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[charles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2015 15:28:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nationalrsol.org/?p=2209#comment-22908</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[There have been several state high courts to rule SO laws unconstitutional, MA being the latest. Question: has there been any state AG to challenge these rulings in a high federal court and maybe even trying to get it these rulings before the US Supreme court? If not I wonder why. But it is long past time the US Supreme Court re-visited registration/residency laws. The Court&#039;s Alaska and Smith rulings in early 2000s were not only bad ruling but also rulings based on bogus residivism statistics. In addition, their holding that registration/residency laws were &quot;NON-PUNITIVE&quot; was either stupid, naive&#039; or a flat out lie---take your pick but it was very wrong to say that  these laws are not punitive. Its like someone telling you that 200 lb pig is actually a 10 lb poodle! I think the majority in Smith held this way because it was the only way they could get around the &quot;Ex Post Facto&quot; and &quot;Due Process&quot; Clauses of the US Constitution. Anyway kudos to the justices of the MA high Court for having the GUTS to stand up FOR the US Constitution and AGAINST those who seek to subvert it.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There have been several state high courts to rule SO laws unconstitutional, MA being the latest. Question: has there been any state AG to challenge these rulings in a high federal court and maybe even trying to get it these rulings before the US Supreme court? If not I wonder why. But it is long past time the US Supreme Court re-visited registration/residency laws. The Court&#8217;s Alaska and Smith rulings in early 2000s were not only bad ruling but also rulings based on bogus residivism statistics. In addition, their holding that registration/residency laws were &#8220;NON-PUNITIVE&#8221; was either stupid, naive&#8217; or a flat out lie&#8212;take your pick but it was very wrong to say that  these laws are not punitive. Its like someone telling you that 200 lb pig is actually a 10 lb poodle! I think the majority in Smith held this way because it was the only way they could get around the &#8220;Ex Post Facto&#8221; and &#8220;Due Process&#8221; Clauses of the US Constitution. Anyway kudos to the justices of the MA high Court for having the GUTS to stand up FOR the US Constitution and AGAINST those who seek to subvert it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Dianne Pedone		</title>
		<link>https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22907</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dianne Pedone]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:47:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nationalrsol.org/?p=2209#comment-22907</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thank God, finally justice! Prayers for all states to follow.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank God, finally justice! Prayers for all states to follow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: sandy		</title>
		<link>https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22906</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[sandy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2015 11:55:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nationalrsol.org/?p=2209#comment-22906</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22905&quot;&gt;Delilah&lt;/a&gt;.

Certainly we would like to see this in every state. The suits must be brought in each state. It will require plaintiffs who are willing to see it through and, in most cases, can afford on-going litigation and attorneys who are in it for the long haul. RSOL and the other interested parties can help in writing the amicus brief, which reduces some of the attorney expense, but we cannot initiate suits in individual states.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22905">Delilah</a>.</p>
<p>Certainly we would like to see this in every state. The suits must be brought in each state. It will require plaintiffs who are willing to see it through and, in most cases, can afford on-going litigation and attorneys who are in it for the long haul. RSOL and the other interested parties can help in writing the amicus brief, which reduces some of the attorney expense, but we cannot initiate suits in individual states.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Delilah		</title>
		<link>https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22905</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Delilah]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2015 04:34:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nationalrsol.org/?p=2209#comment-22905</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Please nevada next! Does this mean while on parole also ?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Please nevada next! Does this mean while on parole also ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Brenda Sontag		</title>
		<link>https://www.narsol.org/2015/08/mass-supreme-court-strikes-down-residency-laws-compares-them-to-japanese-internment-camps/#comment-22904</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brenda Sontag]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2015 21:06:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nationalrsol.org/?p=2209#comment-22904</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Way to go. Can we get you guys in Texas!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Way to go. Can we get you guys in Texas!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
