It would be a valuable precedent decision lending legitimacy and language to similar concerns here.

Good Lord, they retroactively hit you with the registry 7 years after your case was adjourned from when you were a minor!?! That’s just plain wrong. My mental health has noticeably deteriorated as well in the last two years. You and I are approaching the 30 year mark for goodnesses sakes and new punishments and complications keep coming. We’ve experienced a barrage of cumulative stressors and harm as a direct result of being on the registry. It’s no wonder we’re breaking down. We’re only human. I manage my situation through regular exercise, total sobriety and a healthy lifestyle but that doesn’t solve all the problems I’m having here lately. Weird shit……not good. I’ve been doing extensive research on this topic and have been in touch with experts in the field. I am writing an evidence based and psychologically descriptive article I hope to publish here by the end of the year that identifies exactly what happens to people when they experienced the sex offender registry for long periods of time. Until then it’s One Day At A Time. We’ve come this far damn it!

No, it is persuasive at best for other courts to include SCOTUS. It can be a factor in judicial considerations across the country, but won’t outright make them in the thinking of being for the PFR. If the justices agree the tools and method are skewed incorrectly to label PFR, they could force the state to reevaluate their tools and methods to more correctly assess one who has been convicted of a sex crime. As well as saying it is punishment, which it is (we know) and society deems appropriate to do against their fellow humans, then the floodgates would open to other litigation but justices shouldn’t be afraid of that if the initial error is so egregious, as this is. Opening up the courts to the people to seek redress and correction is not a problem for the people who pay for the courts to operate. Workload is not a valid excuse to find a case in another way, the incorrect way.

Like to remind the forum, this was similarly challenged in the 2020 Millard v. Camper (also known as Millard v. Sloan) when the 10th CCOA overturned the lower court case where it did not find in the way we would’ve liked in favor of the PFR by saying the SORA is punishment and in violation of 8A (Punishment, not SDB). You can find more about that case online. The late great Judge Matsch knew what he was talking about when he opined for the PFR in the lower court.

I feel your pain. I also have been on since the creation of the registry when I was 23 for a offense that happened when I was 16. My mental health has seriously deteriated in the past 2 years. I am on 2 different medications because of the impact of the registry. I pray every night that the good lord takes me. My patience is running out.

Good morning. You are not alone brother. I’m blessed with a compassionate wife as well. For years, I felt like I was wondering lost in a desert but now through FAC we can find others and not face this impossible and cruel situation by ourselves. Victory is not at hand but neither is defeat!

Thank you. After decades of bitter experience, I’m researching the specific psychological impacts of the registry on the mind as it relates to known metal health outcomes and will hopefully have an informative article written soon.

Exactly that is what I was asking….I mean, if the judge concludes that convincingly lifetime registration is punishment, does that influence what the Supreme Court has decided that according to their twisted logic it doesn’t amount to punishment?…would that caused a rippled effect to other jurisdiction to take a closer look at their lifetime registration laws?….would that cause the states to create another set of laws to prevent this judge decision to spill over to other states and federal laws to be successfully challenged?….I mean, in my opinion, this a very important case and one that, in my very limited understanding, can potentially have a cascade effect all across the nation, if…is successfully challenged…so I think as well that many crooked lawmakers, lobbyists, and folks in power have a very keen interest and monitoring this case very very closely.

Persuasive at best

Static-99 has the 17 year mark, but agree with you completely on 10 and 10 as well as your premise overall.

I believe the reply by MS was intended for the FAC article and not your post specifically. What MS is asking is how a decision in favor of the registrant in Colorado will affect registrants in Florida if at all