Clements v Florida Denied Writ
The US Supreme Court met in conference on Friday, Dec 8, to discuss a number of cases including Clements v Florida. You will recall this case requested the Court to declare that being on the registry under Florida’s SORNA was being held “in custody” under Federal Statute.
This morning the Court published that they have denied the petition.
A positive spin is that this case was not the right approach to further address the issue that the registry is punishment. Being “in custody” under a writ of habeous has an element of creative thinking, but so were the penumbras of previous cases and the Chevron deference to Government agencies until the major decisions cases and so and so on.
No area of federal or state law remains as unsettled as the existence of SORNA, SORR and Ex Post Facto. No area of law is as incongruent with constitutional principles. The fact is that SORNA is punishment; that SORR can’t be linked to improved measures of safety for children or vulnerable adults; and that these schemes are not civil but criminal in nature. Most damning of all, however, is that legislators are free to legislate new ex post facto requirements every day without consequence and without limits except when a few brave judges put some brakes on the efforts. That makes this scheme entirely un-recognizable in the rest of the country’s constitutional and legal framework. This will compel time in front of SCOTUS.
Federal Districts are starting to divide and progress is being made at some state levels so there is evidence of some progress. A different case will need to champion this effort at the US Supreme Court.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The US Constitution itself does not state Ex Post Facto laws only apply to criminal law. It was the USSC in 1798 who decided, incorrectly according to most constitutional lawyers, that EX Post Facto did not include Civil law. Get that overturned with a case that has nothing to do with SORNA or the registry and it would go away for all civil laws.
Yes, Calder v Bull needs another review, a more in-depth review of it to see the error of the court then.
There is nothing Civil in Nature about Floridas, Registry. Florida Civil Statutes are in TITLE VI, CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Ch.45-88. Florida Criminal Statutes are, TITLE XLVI CRIMES Ch.775-896. So there is 700 chapters between Florida Civil and Criminal law… this alone should overturn Florida Registry is argued right as it contradicts the Alaska Supreme Court case of 2003, Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84 (2003)
Imagine that you were sentenced to 15 years and part way through, the judge changes their mind and re-sentences you life on paperwork. Would that be legal? Well that is basically what has happened to many of us. And they keep getting away with it because they state it is not punishment. I doubt a single judge would last 90 days on the registry.
I believe this is good news really. We don’t want anything but the best case possible making it to Scotus. You see what Smith V Doe has done for over two decades. It has done nothing but hurt us. We don’t need more of that.
I agree. This case was not the rock solid one we needed. If ruled against us it would set us back years. I do believe that case it out there and will force SCOTUS’ hand one day.
Why am I not surprised considering how many of those in government appear to into questionable things it’s no wonder that they continue to demonize a very select few. Those most passionately working to continue this registry are the most likely to actually belong on it.
Looking at the direction the country is going it’s not going to matter soon anyway. Glad I am old and will at least not have to live through what is in store for the USA and the world in general. Dark days
This case would have been entirely different at the district court and appellate court level IF the plaintiff was on probationary/supervised release status because that status is considered “in custody” for the purposes of habeas proceedings in federal court. We need someone on probation/supervised release to tweak Mr. Clement’s arguments. I would have done it myself but my federal supervision terminated already.
SCOTUS Justices are [moderated]. Yes, we know that everyone dislikes S.O. issues, but, GD!, it is their job to address these legal issues! 😠
Supreme court will never overturn SORNA. They are scared to death of the consequences of doing so, even knowing it is constitutionally illegal and ineffective. Anyone with a brain can see that after reviewing the data for 15 minutes.
I remember a district judge saying “I will not be the one to bring down the Registry” and have to deal with the consequences of doing so.
Someday there will be a judge close to retirement who will do the right thing.
Judge Matsch tried at the US Fed Court of CO and it was overturned by the 10th CCOA
I remember that and I also remember then Judge Gorsich dessenting with this line “We can not give the states a blank check” or something to that effect. I agree SCOTUS is going to punt on this until one of wins at the COA level on the arguement of addtions to the First SORNA upheld by Doe V Alaska. All I am asking for is that. Look at what it was initially and what it is now and rull the now expost facto.
Well, “someday” is a nonspecific theoretical point which exists only as a concept in the mind and in a future which may or may not exist.
We only have the present to live in and as such we just got screwed.
The same fear you allege holds them is the same that held slavery and segregated education in place until someone brought forth a case they could not refuse and reversed precedent.