Supreme Court Update
Moments ago the SCOTUS posted their order. 11 cases were granted certiorary. Neither of the sex offender cases we are following were on the list.
A copy of the order can be found here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/092817zr_9o6b.pdf
NOTE: THE REMAINDER OF THIS POST HAS CAUSED CONFUSION AND THEREFORE HAS BEEN REMOVED
Although this is disappointing there is one thing at the heart of this case that I am clinging on to – at the heart of this case was the finding that the registry IS cruel and unusual punishment. As FAC explained sometimes when SCOTUS does not hear a case it is because they already agree with the findings. Cruel and unusual punishment is part of the US Constitution. And although this case is an ex post facto case the “meat” of the whole decision are those 3 words. One punishment cannot be cruel and unusual for one if not for all. That is what I am clinging to in this.
And yes SCOTUS has indeed overturned several of their own decisions – a big one was Brown vs. The Board of Education (the case that led to the dismantling of racial segregation) that case overturned a case called Plessy vs. Ferguson (that upheld separate but equal) – it took 50 years but it did happen.
Ill go to circuit with My Name not Doe.
hello,
I would like to know how you know Snyder was denied today?
I am from Michigan and I asked The ACLU attorney Ms Aukerman and she said we don’t know what SCOTUS has decided as of yet.
Also I e-mail Ms Amy Howe, from scotusblog and this was her reply back tome not long ago.
They did not act on Snyder today. They could act on it on Monday, when they issue a lot of additional orders from the September 25 conference. (There is a chance that they will not and instead hold it over for reconsideration at the next conference, but a relatively small one.)
So again how do you know Snyder was denied, when no one else knows the answer to does v Snyder yet. Just curios how you know it was denied. Thank you for your time.
If you read our previous comment. I wrote that I want to be very clear and careful in explaining that it wasn’t denied. There was no denial issued.
We wrote that it was not on the order of accepted cases that were accepted.
As you indicated, there is a “relatively small” chance it will be held over for reconsideration on the next conference.
Think of it as getting into college… there are thousands of applicants and few get accepted. They post the list of “accepted” students on a specific day. Snyder was not on that list. Like a student who didn’t get accepted – there’s a small chance that student may make a “wait list” or was inadvertently omitted from the accepted list.
Until an order comes back saying certiorary was denied, nobody is saying it was denied. It was just not one of the 11 cases accepted.
Bobby,
Thanks for that info. The term “denied” was rescinded in a stupid question I asked, so you are correct; FAC has not said cert. denied. I got all excited there for a minute.
Respectfully
DW
I have a question, I was convicted in 1996, I was told the law then was 10-15 years and if no problems I could apply to be taken off the registry, then they changed it to 20, then lifetime, would this help me in any way?
Also, can they keep amending laws that contradict with my “plea”. I mean, I pled to ” you offer this for me to do that”. and then they keep adding stuff, I on the other hand, cant amend my plea, but seems that can add or change it at will. sorry, but I am just having a hard time with all the legal stuff.
This is the idea of an “Ex Post Facto” challenge. Government cannot retroactively apply a harsher punishment to a crime committed on an earlier offense date.
Problem is; this only applies to “punishment” and the Supreme Court in 2003 said the registry was not punishment.
Last year the 6th Circuit ruled it was. Similar cases are pending in other Circuits.
Does this mean that the previous decisions by lower courts will stand?
Yes
And , if you dont mind, what does that mean for us (if anything)? Thought i understood the law but lately seems its elastic to the favor of folly…
Best question I’ve heard all year. American system is summed up astutely in the novel “In Praise of Folly”
Will states in the 6th district be free to revert back to Megan’s Law requirements for those who gain relief from the Snyder v. Doe case?
Is there a law that prevents any legislative body from adjusting their laws with new registration requirements that do not include the problems found by the 6th District?
In other words, How will states in the 6th district attempt to keep their registries alive and well? Can they?