But there ARE rulings in Oklahoma that contradict this ruling. That would make SCOTUS a bit more likely to take up the case.

Matt

WOW, we are clones. My Charges 1991. I agreed to a plea deal to even some crimes I did not commit. Law enforcement said they had my back. Little did I know, the judge I got was a no nonsense Maximum penalty judgement judicial officer. I went back in a few years to try and get a reduction but again, no go. A third attempt happened years later before another judge and finally got a reduction, but by that time I had already served almost a decade. My sentence was 25 years.
And my retroactively applied registry for life was a game changer and not in a good way. Oh, if we only had time machines.

Let’s hope they don’t ask for a full bench review first as they could do within 14 days of the ruling if they desire such action from their belief. If they decide to appeal to SCOTUS, then they still get that option, but there is no guarantee they will take up the case, especially with precedent as noted.

If the state wants to pursue and keep political cred, they’ll evaluate very carefully what they want to do with taxpayer money. In the end, the people of the 8th (and 11th from prior) benefit from this ruling across the board but don’t realize it due to the plaintiff’s situation. They should be celebrating that, but don’t want to associate with the results because of this. Positive collateral consequences is a beautiful thing.

Oh yes So, I was referring to this one in the 8th circuit as persuasive and then did not the 11th circuit rule for the PFR in the Butts county case in GA. I understand that both of these are Posted Signs, however I think a strong comparison could be made to the Markings on the Driver License. It is in a since a sign to whoever sees it that we are either a SO or SP both should be compelled speech.

In my county at least, as long as you’re not on paper there’s no holiday restrictions thank God because I have two small kids.

Have you looked at the ruling? It’s in the link.

FAC

So We are allowed to hand candy out to kids at our house according to the ruling, but we cannot get a chance to get off the registry and move on in our lives? If we can be trusted to have children come to our door, why can’t we be given a chance to move on and get past, our past?

My point is, how many people have re-offended and everyone knows the registry is not what keeps us from re-offending. If someone is Hell bent on re-offending and ruining their lives once again, that is on them. But the state of Florida makes it a collective punishment where if one re-offends; a new law comes out and ALL of us suffer.

Tearfuleagle, which are the two rulings you are referring to, when you write, “Florida now has two rulings to support a dropping of the branded DL’s”?

OA, SORNA is a house of cards, built on sand. Eventually it will be crushed by its own additions. Florida now has two rulings to support a dropping of the branded DL’s. Just because it’s in our pocket doesn’t mean it’s not compelled speech when we have to show it at the Doctors, Banks, Bars, Clubs, Etc. The only people that need to “know” would be Law Enforcement and they can see that when they run the tags. Do bank robbers have a branded DL nope. I would argue that a bank should know if they were convicted bank robber, right?