Update: Miami-Dade SORR Case
The Court had asked both sides (lawyers for the registrants and lawyers for the county) to submit proposed findings of facts and conclusions of law after the residency restriction trial in October.
After a couple extensions, both sides submitted their pleadings last week, which can be read below:
M-D – Finding of Fact – County
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Is it me or is the “not punitive because it wasn’t intended to be” argument getting tiresome? It sounds more and more idiotic every time it’s repeated, in my opinion. That’s like saying the Patriots didn’t lose the Super Bowl because they didn’t intend to.
Also curious about the term “collateral consequence.” Consequence is synonymous with punishment in layman’s terms, isn’t it? Academia distinguishes the two terms, but most people don’t (as far as I can tell).
From Counties Findings of Fact Statement:
As recognized by the Supreme Court, the fact that residency restrictions, generally, were “of fairly recent origin” at the time of the Ordinance No. 05-206’s enactment “suggests that the [ordinance] was not meant as a punitive measure or, at least it did not involve a
traditional means of punishing.” Smith, 538 U.S. at 97
Really? The Supreme Court addressed the issue of residency restrictions in Smith?
in short the states argument: because the requirements of the registry are so onerous that all the defendants had to violate them just to survive all defendants are ineligible to challenge the fact they are to onerous…..
talk about the devil and the deep blue sea..further evidence the government is fully well aware they are committing a crime and what they are doing is criminal..the government operated under the “might makes right” principles..since they have the guns, the money, the power anything they do is acceptable…there is only one way to fight something like that and it Is not the courts that they own.