That’s what we meant – plus to make sure what you are writing is factually correct and relevant.

I’m no Trump fan by any means but let’s not forget Biden helped push all the main registry laws through Congress, and Harris tried banning registrants on social media.

Trump’s administration passed SOSTA/ FESTA, internet censorship laws passed under the guise of sex trafficking, and he’s a big believer in QAnon, and QANon is going to be a major headache for use because we won’t be dealing with intelligent people (we’ll be arguing with tinfoil hat wearing, Alex Jones gay frog water drinking, flat earth underground illuminati satanic pedophilic cannibalistic lizardfolk conspiracy theorists).

I’m voting third party this year.

Resist the temptation to harass, insult, or threaten the regulators, as they have the discretion as to whether or not to take our comments seriously.

If that’s not what FAC meant here then I’m sure they’ll correct me.

Not quite sure what FAC means by this comment.

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/wireStory/feds-release-nationwide-sex-offender-registry-regulation-72418254

@Ed C
Hi, Ed. For those who are labeled Sexual Predators under Megan’s Law, the judge tells them they will have to register the rest of their life at their sentencing, so, it is part of the sentence handed down, as well as PRC.
In most felony cases, it was mandatory that PRC was given, and if it was not given by the judge, then the sentence was void and felons actually had to be brought back to court while in prison, and their sentences vacated, and re-sentenced with PRC and then sent back to prison.
I don’t see much, if any any difference here.
PRC is not part of your imprisonment, (non-punitive) but part of the sentencing, and follows it the same as registration and is handed down orally upon sentencing.
Similarly, if it was mandatory that someone was to be on PRC, but got out of prison before it was found missing on the docket, then they were free from PRC-the court could not impose it, yet now the AG is trying to impose the registry for thousand’s of people that never carried it in their sentences regardless that it is a civil regulation. He is adding to the sentence an ordinance that did not exist, and in order to add anything, just like the PRC, you have to vacate the previous judgment which only a judge can do.
If someone under a previous law which did not carry a lifetime registration though the crime was the same as the one under the newer Megan’s Law or even the most current AWA, then in effect, a new judgment has been rendered that has been added to a past judgment that the judge nor the law required at that time and therefore the Attorney General has, in essence, re-visited and un-finalized the courts’s sentence and amended what was handed down by the judge which I see is a disgusting separation-of-powers violation.
I hope this makes it clear what I am getting at, and thanks Ed, for being so kind in your words 🙂

I HIGHLY recommend running any comments past an affiliate org.

Thanks for the information.

They should get well over 1 million comments. I will be sending plenty.

Regardless of any comments that are sent, it is far past time to continue to allow these harassers any peace. I am going to keep delivering real consequences.

You can submit your statements online with 5000 character limit, however, you can add up to 10 attachments so if you write a longer statement like I did, you can just send it as an attachment in addition to the statement you can add under 5k characters.

I sent quite a bit of info including entire articles from my site. Not sure any of it will be read but at least it will be on the record.

If you want to send it in the mail, the address is:

To: Regulations Docket Clerk
Office of Legal Policy
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Room 4234
Washington, DC 20530

David, I think you are not quite on point. Remember registration is not part of the punishment stipulated by the court. It is a civil regulatory measure. I don’t see any separation of powers question here. Please let me know if I am not interpreting this correctly.

Veritas.