I don’t think that James will mind my passing on his news. He is not in jail, but he was told that he should not be on this site posting comments. He is complying with the directive and thankful to still be on probation rather than a more stringent alternative.

James, I haven’t seen you comment on any articles recently, so I fear the worst. Is everything ok?

Watching for it. Don’t see it.

I believe they submitted it in Mid December after the U.S. Supreme Court denied the emergency stay request on the lower courts ruling.

So, basically, what I am getting at is: we all have to stick together. Only together can we hope to affect a positive change on the situation we are now in. If this case is successful, it’s a GREAT sign!

Homefacts, City-Data, and Mugshots.com all run mirrors of the Registry. They will extort a fee from a Registrant that asks to be removed. All 3 of those sites don’t remove Registrants from their sites after they are removed from the Registry either by being deceased or having served their required duration on the Registry. But, nothing is being done about that. And nothing ever will. The ONLY people who care about our rights are our family members, loved ones, and NARSOL.

Since my state does not have such a ban like North Carolina tried to impose, I have been trying to do exactly what your suggestion is for over two years now. Unfortunately, Homefacts is not the only site that copies information from the registries. Furthermore, these sites have really high search engine rankings as a whole, so social media accounts don’t always bump them unless they are highly active accounts. I have successfully bumped Homefacts to page 3 for my name, but another company doing the same thing ended up on page one of Google. My Bing results are a different story though. There is nothing on my status on Bing until about page 3.

I wonder if our argument could be equal protection of the law or something like that. If an offender had a similar name to a celebrity, their status would basically remain hidden online without regard to social media, however, if the offender has a rather unique name (of which I qualify), they will have to put their name on as many links as possible to bury the damning links. This doesn’t seem fair to me.

hey rajendra how are you? may i ask what state u reside in? i am from same country as you are and in same boat in this registry and it has messed up my entire life and not just mine but family as well.

Unfortunately, I don’t think there’s much of a leg to stand on against Homefacts, and you’re not the only person battling with that. The good news is that if this law gets struck down, you can create a dozen social media profiles and keep them active and dynamic, which will push Homefacts off to page 2 of Google results – but you’ll have to put your real name on everything!

That’s well put, Fred. What’s really going on during oral arguments is that the justices are communicating with each other by using their questions to the attorneys to point out how they are understanding the contours of the case. All the really important statistical data and substantive arguments have already been made through the briefs…which most of the justices will have had their clerks read and summarize. They’re not ignorant about the facts or the statistical data. If anything, they don’t believe that data is necessary for a final disposition of this particular case. But, again, oral argument is not about the attorneys–it’s how the justices talk to each other about how the case is going to be resolved.