Federal Judge Allows Challenge to Idaho Registry to Go Forward
A Federal district judge has issued an order denying the State of Idaho’s motion to dismiss its challenge to SORA. Plaintiffs represented by civil rights attorney Matthew Strugar “have plausibly alleged that SORA is so punitive in effect that it negates the Idaho legislature’s intent to enact a civil regulatory scheme. As such, plaintiffs’ ex post facto and double jeopardy claims survive the instant motion to dismiss.”
Citing Supreme Court precedent, however, the court warns that “to find SORA unconstitutional, ‘only the clearest proof’ will suffice to override legislative intent and transform what has been denominated a civil remedy into a criminal penalty.”
Good luck Idaho, with Montana recently saying its registry is punishment hopefully Idaho will follow suit.
I should have studied law and not medicine. Within my experience I would like to know what constitutes civil. My experiences in Florida felt punitive as was Ohio. The state where I live now, I live in farm country, they local Leo mostly leaves me alone. Although finding work is still nearly impossible.
I pray you find meaningful work.
Perhaps file a claim for PTSD based on the reasons you can’t find work.
Don’t give up,
Keep mocking on doors, you’ll be surprised what can happen.
Thank you. I keep trudging forward. It’s one day at a time.
Perhaps Registants could and should start claims of PTSD, based on the punishment our states have slammed us with.
Perhaps with enough
“facts of ABUSE”
A Class Action suit might turn heads to the criminally of our legislators and laws?
P.S.
just as easy as it is to get a medical marijuana card for anxiety, the doctors used in this process,
Clearly are motivated to approve access to products for a host of traumatic issues.
Perhaps a few doctors who are sympathetic to our cause and willing to go on record?
So this Judge allows the case to go forward: Great News. But then says,
Citing Supreme Court precedent, however, the court warns that “to find SORA unconstitutional, ‘only the clearest proof’ will suffice to override legislative intent and transform what has been denominated a civil remedy into a criminal penalty.”
Just thinking outside the box, maybe instead of trying to get the registry abolished, we agree with SCOTUS, but then show how much the registry has morphed into punishment, and instead of abolished we make the case that it should be rolled back to its original intended aim.
Some of you will think I am crazy, but am I really. What would happen if a Judge in Florida agreed with this argument? Many of us would be off the registry because our offense was before 1997. Many of us would be off the registry because it has been more than 10 years since release of Sanction and only a few would be left under the crippling effects of the 2014 and 2018 laws. Then those under those crippling effects could still make a case that those laws moved the registry from civil to punitive.
Just me thinking outside the box. Bash away!!! Happy 4th of July.
So they are allowing it to go forward so they can squash us like bugs, kick us in the tail as we leave the court room and laugh at us as that tail is tucked between our legs. Almost every clause in the registry regime has a path to being arrested so how again is that not punishment?
I could list the 100s of ways we can get arrested for the non punishment, punishment registry but we all already know them very well. Not feeling the love on 4th of July. Our country once again has let us down.
I like the “clearest proof” comment. Wish that level was applied when coming up with these draconian laws in the first place
When the USSC incorrectly ruled on SORNA and unleashed this stupidity, they ruled on a civil program whose entire basis was a public registry of where people lived. I have no doubt Idaho is like Florida and most States in that we now have programs with 50-60 new requirements which continue to grow almost every legislative cycle. At some point, one might argue what was once a civil program has now become a criminal sentence due to its expanding nature. I can only imagine that is the argument that is going to be made in Idaho. I wish them the best of luck.