Why would that be restricted to female? If a man and woman get married, can’t the man change his last name to hers? If not, I would expect that to become legal soon enough.

The criminal regimes really think that it is acceptable that if a person gets a divorce that he/she must keep the name of their ex-spouse? Wow. If that is the case, they must force that “law” onto anyone who commits any crime, right? Yes? No! Only if a crime involves SSSSSEEEEEXXXXX! GD ridiculous.

The real problem is that the criminal regimes must pretend that their Hit Lists are useful. That is the real problem. So they must always act as if the Hit Lists matter in some way and that they are legitimate and sensible. That is the real problem. So they muck around and muck around with them all the time, grasping at increasing stupid and pathetic straws. The entirety of the Hit Lists is designed for stupid people and to placate stupid people. People with brains don’t need Hit Lists.

Dustin
That is a good point.
This is just another notch in the “Why is the registry punishment” belt of injustice.
I am starting to (no, I already have) a feeling like we are living in Soviet Russia where they make up the rules as they go along.

And the state’s argument that registrants can avoid registration by legally changing their name is absurd, shown by this case where both names are registered. It’s just denying a right for the sake of denying rights and nothing more.

I am sure with the Correct Legalese, Not a Judge on a Bench would NOT AGREE!

The Newest Jurist, Ms Amy, would, probably, Also, agree, in Tandem!