OK: Municipal league wants retroactive sex offender residency restrictions
The Oklahoma Municipal League recently filed an Amicus Brief in a case brought against the City of El Reno related to the right of a municipality to enforce the provision of the Sex Offenders Registration Act.
A suit was brought against the City of El Reno for applying a retroactive application of the Sex Offenders Registration Act. Because the offender was sentenced prior to current changes to the Act, they are not required to follow current law. The offender is being allowed to relocate their residence to a location that would be prohibited if they were convicted today.
“Municipalities have a duty to protect their citizens, especially the most vulnerable among us,” said Mike Fina, Executive Director of the Oklahoma Municipal League. “Our Law Enforcement Officers know the dangers presented to their communities, and there should be one set of rules to follow to keep habitual and aggravated offenders away from daycares, parks and schools.”
The rules to the SORA change depending on when the offender was sentenced. OML’s position is that all offenders should be required to comply with the current setback rules at the time of their relocation for all prospective residency decisions.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Isn’t it funny how the states that do not have the registrant residence restrictions proposed by Senator Coleman don’t have the issues that he is supposedly so concerned with? In those states, when sex offenses occur at schools, it’s always by a staff member, not the registrant across the street. When they occur at churches, it’s always by a clergy member, not the registrant around the corner. At parks, always by someone from out of town, not the registrant that resides 995 feet down the road.
Perhaps in committee, Senator Coleman could provide something besides unverified anecdotes to show his proposal’s purported need. Or something showing the effectiveness of such policy in other jurisdictions. Or how he intends to address the ex post facto lawsuits that will surely follow.
This makes as much sense as requiring someone who paid a $25 traffic fine 30 years ago to now pay a $130 fine because the laws changed and the fees went up. Or make someone who served 3 days in jail 20 years ago to now serve 27 more days because the crime now requires a 30 day jail sentence.
There would be a nationwide protest and civil unrest if crap like that happened, but no one seems to care when new laws are retroactively applied to registered citizens.
Disgusted in Michigan; Well said. 🥳🤔👍
Why can’t all these entitled entities who don’t want to be around registrants move away from the registrants on their own instead? They have plenty of places they can go.
GL
I hate when people use the name “Karens”, but in this situation, it fits. (I apologize in advance to anyone named Karen)
GL…exactly!