Five registrants have filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court challenging a new state law that allows all felons, except those convicted of a sex offense, to serve as jurors. According to the lawsuit, the new law violates the equal protection clause of the state’s constitution.
The new law, which began as Senate Bill 310, did not initially exclude registrants from jury service. That version of the bill passed the Senate, however, the bill was later amended to exclude registrants in the Assembly’s Appropriations Committee.
“There is absolutely no reason given in the legislative history of Senate Bill 310 for the exclusion of registrants from jury service,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “And there is no rational basis for that exclusion.”
As currently written, the law allows individuals convicted of murder, kidnapping, robbery and other violent offenses to serve on juries.
Obviously crafted after Floriduh’s Amendment 4. So why isn’t Amendment 4 unconstitutional for the same reason (equal protection clause)?
“SECTION 2. Basic rights.—All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property.”
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?submenu=3
Why should they be a register offender in virginia got 3 months with work release to run for senator seat and was reelected he had a victim and there are alot in florida fron internet sex sting with NO VICTIMS get 18 months to 5 yrs probation registery homeless with the other that had victim had misademeanor why is that here is why because others aren’t polititicians
Perfect example of singling out a specific group of people (aka RSO).
It never ceases to amaze me the level in which our society will go thru to discriminate against other’s.