A Federal Judge Says the DOJ’s Sex Offender Registration Rules Violate Due Process by Requiring the Impossible

The U.S. Department of Justice has threatened to prosecute people for failing to register even when their state no longer requires nor allows them to do so.

According to Reason.com, “Someone who fails to meet these requirements and travels outside his state can be charged with a federal crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison.  At trial, the defendant has the burden of proving that he was unable to register as required by the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA).”

A federal judge in California has ruled that this violates the constitutional right to due process.

U.S. District Judge Jesus G. Bernal wrote, the Justice Department “has done exactly what is forbidden by the Constitution: ‘to declare an individual guilty or presumptively guilty of a crime.’”  Bernal continues, saying that the Department of Justice “subverts the procedural safeguards deeply rooted in our history and constitutional framework.”

The Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws (ACSOL) joined this lawsuit.  Thank you, Janice Bellucci.

SOURCE


Discover more from Florida Action Committee

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

101 thoughts on “A Federal Judge Says the DOJ’s Sex Offender Registration Rules Violate Due Process by Requiring the Impossible

    • January 26, 2023

      They been threatening this for years. When these laws started they wanted to make that a part of the registry.

      Reply
  • January 25, 2023

    Creating demons from a few high-profile, admittedly heinous, crimes in the 80s and 90s made it prime material for politicians to fan the flames to get the votes.

    MADD did more for public safety than the sex offender registry!

    One theme to the offender rehabilitation I went through after prison was that almost every…single…man had childhood trauma or bullying that created an environment where the individual did not develop socially/emotionally or was abused where their actions later in life were a learned experience from the past. If you want to stop having so many sex offenses, then don’t worry about those who have already fallen to those psychological illnesses. What they need to do is change it from a registry of sex offenders to a registry of the juvenile delinquents and bullies who are ultimately responsible for creating childhood victims who grow into maladjusted adults who don’t know any better or have the skills from a healthy upbringing to know right from wrong and how to have healthy relationships. That’s God’s honest truth that needs to be aired out to the public.

    Reply
  • January 25, 2023

    The following commissioners will be term-limited next year:

    John Tobia
    Rita Pritchett
    Kristine Zonka

    At the risk of sounding partisan, I say good riddance to these clowns, and let’s hope they figure out a way to make an honest living rather than seek higher office where they could do more damage.

    Reply
  • January 25, 2023

    The most obvious example of it being criminal is that most of the provisions they have added throughout the years have not been retroactive. Aside from the markings on the DL, and internet identifiers, all of the laws have been “On or After” a certain date, such as the residency restrictions, and the 20/25 yr registrant pertaining to the case out of Polk County. Also, the juvenile registry, unlike the adult registry, was written as “any juvenile convicted on or after Oct 1, 2007”, whereas the adult registry was written as “anyone convicted on or after Oct 1 1994, or still serving sanctions”. How is it possible that this point has not been argued? Do I have to argue it? I can’t afford any more attorneys at this point.

    Reply
    • January 25, 2023

      The ex post facto lawsuit maybe posted a year ago showed all the stipulations they have added over the years, it is being argued it just hasn’t successfully been argued yet. FAC lawyers just recently were able to overcome the B.S. statue limitation claims and will now go to court in a few months to prove its punishment.

      Reply
      • January 25, 2023

        They will stonewall it for as long as they can for that crap. Far and few judges willing to streamline this injustice today. Even putting it blunt in their face punishment they say they don’t see it.

        Reply
        • January 25, 2023

          ‘They will stonewall’ except they most recently ruled in our favor.

          Reply
          • January 26, 2023

            Yes the courts did. I don’t know the facts on these 2 Expo Factos cases I just hope they do have a good outcome. Here is the Federal Constitutional Law. Congress is prohibited from passing ex post facto laws by clause 3 of Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution. Now I’m sure Florida has something in theirs also. Here is what can become an issue. The registry is not criminal it is a civil matter. An ACT can have 2 Due Process, 1 criminal and 1 civil. Until you have had civil due process can they enforce any law on you until you have a civil judgement date? They may have to take an offender back to court for a Civil judgement unless they already have one like I do from New Jersey. Here is the Federal Ruling. United States, 409 U.S. 232 (1972), the Supreme Court held, “Congress may impose both a criminal and a civil sanction in respect to the same act or omission, for the Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits merely punishing twice, or attempting a second time to punish criminally, for the same offense.” Yes, I have been working on a case that LE has feared would happen.

            Reply
            • January 26, 2023

              Anyone pursuing a constitutional challenge, I would urge them to stay in touch with FAC’s Legal Committee. Don’t fight this alone.

              Reply
              • January 26, 2023

                It’s above Constitutional challenge as it has already been ruled on by the courts all the way to the 3rd circuit where it all started in N.J. The laws they are enforcing were created way after my conviction. I’m a NJ Megans Law retroactive Tier 1 that is a B52. Crazy as it sounds this is what it all means. Retroactive- I was convicted in 2/93 placed on registry when I was released on 2/95 pending constitutional law. Tier 1 – Not for Public Notification. This Judgement was on 3/96 the Fed law wasn’t created until 5/17/96 B52 – B is for before the Attorney General Janet Reno stepped in with her 2 cents taking the burden off the offender an placing it on the prosecutor. ( We retros were all tiered by then ) The 52 is I am one of only 52 who challenged the prosecutors assessment and won a tier reduction by the courts. I need to find away to get with people who have had dealings with a Sgt. In Lee County here in FL.

                Reply
              • January 27, 2023

                so basically what this is coming down to is
                there is no more 10 25 LIFE so after you have done your tour of the registry the feds now want to put a person back on it?

                Reply
                • January 27, 2023

                  The Feds haven’t said that, no.

                  Reply
                • January 28, 2023

                  thank you Jacob
                  this entire nightmare makes no sense at all
                  as for a person commented PTSD that is a true statement
                  cause after a person has been off for many yrs (18) and put there life back together and built a good reputation and a family life. the government wants to rip that away from a citizen with double jeopardy after completion of the requirements of the reg.

                  and that’s not punishment? putting them back in the 1960s Era of MLK and segregation and the destruction and the stigma of a 2nd class citizen.

                  was also reading as well a withhold/deferred sentence/Alfred plea is still considered a conviction under federal laws

                  Reply
                • January 28, 2023

                  I have often thought if all of the over 1 million registered folks got together and formed a human chain and blocked major intersections until there was change, we might get heard.

                  Then I remembered several points. Most of us what to stay out of the lime light. Secondly we would probably all be arrested, unlike others who are allowed to protest, we would most likely be deemed causing a riot or disturbance. Even if charges thrown out, we would all have a new arrest our records.

                  To be clear, I do not fear for myself, I fear for my family, that is why I stay in the shadows. I am going through a huge fight with my neighbors now due to Nextdoor outting me. People who have known my family for 40 years now what to slice our tires, they throw trash in our driveway and more.
                  The few neighbors who stood up for me have since given up because they are now being attacked for standing up for me. All this for charges for something that happened 33 years ago.

                  Reply
                • January 28, 2023

                  https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2023/01/27/biden-taps-retired-albany-city-court-judge-for-doj-sex-offender-management-post/ Came across this yesterday this is what I got past a pay wall: Biden Taps Retired Albany City Court Judge for DOJ Sex Offender Management Post
                  Former Judge Helena Heath said it’s an opportunity to have a meaningful and impactful role in using that particular law to protect individuals from sexual abuse.

                  President Joe Biden appointed former Albany City Court Judge Helena Heath to a U.S. Department of Justice role assisting criminal justice professionals on their sex offender management activities, effective on Monday.
                  Heath, who has 33 years of legal experience in public service, will direct the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART). Thought it was interesting what’s going on.

                  Reply
                • January 30, 2023

                  Cherokee Jack and others

                  here is something that is real…I can bet my life there isn’t 1 registered citizen who dont wake up EVERY morning with some kind of thoughts of being on the registry or former member of the club. that is called PTSD I’m former.18 yrs and I still to this day the thoughts are ALWAYS in my head.
                  either the knock on the door from LE or a neighbor trying to do some kind of harm or retribution or some new law or legislation to create more drama and PTSD in the head.

                  Now we know or government pays veterans some not all depending on the degree of the PTSD

                  here is what I’m driving at there are 1 million members
                  we ballpark the number of family members and children
                  Ill go 1/2 so 500.000 (on the lowside)
                  using the figures of 1.5 million ppl affected by the PTSD
                  yes children and family members deal with some sort of PTSD from the registry directly or indirectly

                  a civil suit filed against the the US government for unwarranted PTSD due to harm and threats and anything else a attorney could toss in. 1.5 million cases of PTSD the government created
                  due to civil rights violations just sayin its proof that the registry hurts more families then it protects

                  civil suits pay damages more motivation of the person with nothing left in life to come out and stand up

                  Reply
              • January 29, 2023

                hey Jacob – So are the feds putting people back on the registry or not??? Because I didn’t understand your answer to #experienced

                Reply
                • January 29, 2023

                  Feds have not put anyone back on the registry, to my knowledge.

                  And part of the aim of the CA lawsuit is to ensure they don’t even try.

                  The article states that DOJ has ‘threatened to prosecute people.’ Well, yes and no. The ‘threat’ is that they have issued regulations. Plaintiffs in this suit are trying to make sure that the DOJ never gets a chance to enforce those regulations on former registrants and others.

                  Reply
            • January 26, 2023

              what’s good about that is that many states have changed their laws regarding the registry, and North Carolina is one of them. They had to reclassify everyone basically, and even out of state registrants at that. When you go to register, you have a right to elect a court hearing to determine if your case falls within NC’s definition of a crime that requires registration.

              Reply
              • January 26, 2023

                Florida did that here back in 2002 I think it was. I remember when the Deputy came here an told me that they had classified me as an offender. I was like okay well where is my due process? He said there is no process you are what we say you are. That’s when I knew they don’t have a clue what they are doing.

                Reply
                • January 29, 2023

                  Experenced ,
                  I just thought it was interesting that Bidden just appointed this retired judge to head up the S.M.A.R.T office post. We have a partial injunction in California involving a Fed vs State registration issued just recently maybe just is just something to watch. And this new lady is appointed to head up the group they just might be wanting to move in a new direction on policy, I really doubt it tho if the person she replaces is just going to be the deputy director. It could just be a random hiring event. I thought it kind of would tie into your question about the Feds coming back for people who had did their time. With maybe SMART wanting to move into a different direction. From the few articles I could find it just looks like a typical job vacancy post hiring, so just disregard my comment.

                  Reply
                • January 30, 2023

                  Eugene V. Debs No thank you very much for your thoughts and input on your comment Im older had TBI back in my 20s and the residuals of it are catching up quickly comprehension thought process and seems dementia is not far behind.
                  dont want to spend my so called last yrs of life in the streets or tent city due to the feds wanting to destroy more life then it intends to save..

                  Had another thought come to me too. and was wondering the what ifs. war breaks out and now the Gov. says we are low life’s yet when it come time to fight “there” War im sure the younger generation of the registered persons club will be the 1 ones to hit the front lines ,
                  basically following the same 60s Era of the black man the former 2nd class citizen’s

                  Reply
            • January 26, 2023

              Unfortunately, ex post facto suits can’t be won by explaining the constitution to the court. There must be clear proof that the registry provisions are purely punitive, that they have nothing to do with re-offending or public safety. And to make that argument requires the involvement of expert witnesses. These experts are expensive, which is why it’s fortunate that FAC raised so much $ for its ex post facto challenges.

              Reply
              • January 26, 2023

                Well it is punitive when you have a judgement that says not for public notification an they still made it public by using a constitutional law that was created after the judgement.

                Reply
                • January 27, 2023

                  No. A judgement is not required to enumerate every future administrative regulation that one will be subject to. Unless that administrative regulation is in fact nothing more than a punishment. Which must be clearly proven. Which cannot be clearly proven without prudent use of costly expert witnesses.

                  It shouldn’t be this way, in my opinion, but my opinion is not what matters, not yours, but the courts’.

                  That’s why FAC’s EPF challenges are being argued in the way that they are.

                  Reply
                • January 27, 2023

                  Pointing out to the court that a regulatory scheme wasn’t contained in the judgment order, won’t be sufficient to prove in court that that regulatory scheme is in fact just punitive. Even when you and I are absolutely convinced that that’s what it is.

                  Folks’ll get mad at me for pointing this out, but I’m just the messenger.

                  Reply
                • January 31, 2023

                  @Jacob. You can never say never anymore, even when common sense tells you it’s not.

                  Reply
              • January 27, 2023

                Jacob
                What is unfortunate is, some judges (Being human) have their own ideas, thoughts and agendas. You could blind poll 20 judges of equal authority on an issue and you could get 20 different opinions.
                Too much emotion goes into rulings about sex offenses. My judge basically gave me a sentence equal to committing a murder. It took me several years to win an appeal. By that time, I only had 6 years left of a 25-year sentence.
                You cannot tell me some judges already know what they are going to rule even before hearing your case. Before I get moderated or censored, this is my opinion and also not all judges are like that.
                My proof of that is, if I was not over sentenced, why did an appeals judge cancel the remaining sentence when the original judge denied me 3 times, even after staying out of trouble and doing 75% of my sentence.
                Even some of the best superstar lawyers do not always win. Lawyers who claim to only win do so by only taking cases that are a slam dunk like an elderly lady getting hit by a city bus.

                Reply
      • January 25, 2023

        Yes, my date was a bit off. I was thinking about the year that I took a plea. As far as the Oct 1, having that date stuck in my head caught me a FTR charge, because I forgot it was the month prior and I was thinking it was Oct. Now, I can’t get off the registry supposedly. Even though I have pointed out another flaw in their wording of the law, saying that if you are convicted of any felony or misdemeanor offense, you are not eligible to be removed. Well, I’ve pointed out to several people now, that failing to registry can, in no way shape or form be considered an criminal offense. You are not going on any kind of offensive, at all. It can only be considered a crime. If they(law enforcement and prosecutors) want to nit pick words in statutes, why can’t we?? Nonetheless, I condemn the registry and everything it is about. There is no way that you could not convince a neutral jury or judges that it is a punishment. Anyone would agree. They turn their heads because they answer to no one. It’s disgraceful and ugly of them.

        Reply
        • January 26, 2023

          Mike
          Just to add to your point. An example is the law in Missouri if you’re on the registry and you are arrested for anything you are automatically put on a tier 3 , which is for life. You don’t have to be charged with anything or convicted only arrested. Even if it’s falsely. Just another way to bump up the figures and incarcerate more people on a registry which is like prison without bars or free meals.

          Reply
          • January 26, 2023

            Wow, I heard MO was tough but I didn’t think that could be done. That should be challenged in Federal Court because when you have a civil tier level done by the court on that ACT they can not exceed the tier level. It’s called Burden of Proof an the state would have to show the court that you have become a higher risk. That would be a tough fight for them with just any arrest. I mean if you are arrested within that time, then yes they can enforce a life registry if that is what your CIVIL judgement states but increase it might have to be done by the courts.

            Reply
    • January 25, 2023

      We have not one but two ex post facto cases being litigated as I type this.

      Reply
    • January 25, 2023

      I’m actually fighting this right now with Lee County an they know they don’t stand a chance so they are passing it off on FDLE. Your date is a bit wrong it is Oct. 1, 1997 unless you had to register in another state then you must register in Florida. Problem Florida has is that people from other states had Civil Due Process that specifically states Not for Public Notification an they just made it public anyway. Their problem was this Civil Judgement was on 3/25/96 58 days before the Federal Amendment of May 17th, 1996 allowing the states to make their registry public record. They are enforcing laws that were created way after my conviction.

      Reply

Comment Policy

  • PLEASE READ: Comments not adhering to this policy will be removed.
  • Be patient. All comments are moderated before they are published. This takes time.
  • Stay on topic. Comments and links should be relevant to this post.
  • *NEW* CLICK HERE if you have an off-topic comment or link.
  • Be respectful. Do not attack, abuse, or threaten. This includes cussing/yelling (ALL CAPS).
  • Cite. If requested, cite any bold or novel claims of fact or statistics, or your comment may be moderated.
  • *NEW* Be brief. If you have a comment of over 2,000 characters, please e-mail it to us for consideration as a member submission.
  • Reminder: Opinions and statements in comments are neither endorsed nor verified by FAC.
  • Moderation does not equal censorship. See this post for more information

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *