ACLU to appeal Miami-Dade SORR Case

The ACLU has fled its Notice of Appeal in the Miami-Dade Sex Offender Residency Case.

The case, which was dismissed in the District Court, reversed in the 11th Circuit and remanded back to the District court and recently lost in the District Court, is making it’s way back to the 11th Circuit.

This is exciting news and keeps hope alive.


Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

16 thoughts on “ACLU to appeal Miami-Dade SORR Case

  • January 22, 2019

    Yet another reason we need to resist bad mouthing ACLU, who are performing a great public service.

    Hopefully among other things they’ll have the chance to rebut the court’s proposition that, since many sex assaults go unreported, it must be registered sex offenders that are disproportionately doing the assaulting, making their recidivism stats more understated than for other types of offenders.

    Completely groundless but pretty sure I read that in the latest ruling.

    Reply
    • January 22, 2019

      Think we are just still hurt and suspect ever since the voting restoration dis. Even they view us as expendable and not on same level.

      Reply
    • January 23, 2019

      Jacob, with all due respect, none of it matters. All that matters is the rule of law and legislative intent. “A statute is an edict of the legislature and the conventional way of interpreting a statute is to seek the ‘intention’ of its maker.”

      In the State of Florida a sex offender who fails to comply with the States residency restriction is subject to criminal prosecution which points directly back to the original offense.

      All other potential criminal prosecutions the offender may face, such as failure to register, is separate from the original offense and any penalty imposed is for that failure.

      This is what separates a regulatory sanction from a criminal penalty. It’s also why the States SORR is applied prospectively, to avoid any conflict with State or Federal constitutions, specifically the Ex Post Facto clause.

      Reply
      • January 23, 2019

        A ‘Civil’ regulatory law with a ‘Civil’ penalty should have a ‘Civil’ punishment. I don’t understand on WHAT grounds they can turn a civil infraction into a criminal punishment?

        Reply
        • January 24, 2019

          I agree with you wholeheartedly.

          Reply
  • January 22, 2019

    Should have been easily ours in the Federal district court. But I’m excited as well to see what happens this time around. Keeping hopeful.

    Reply
  • January 22, 2019

    Geez, it’s like a game of ping pong. But I’m glad the ACLU is not giving this up. Can the 11th this time around strike down the SORR laws of Miami Dade themselves ? Or all they can do is reverse again to the same district court ?

    Reply
  • January 22, 2019

    Easy win ahead. Godspeed to all of us involved!

    Reply
  • January 21, 2019

    Great Awesome News!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  • January 21, 2019

    Awesome news. Keep it up! …and up and up to SCOTUS.

    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 *