Comments on: Judge further delays start of Tennessee law that bans sex offenders from living with their own children

By: Jacob

Jacob — Thu, 27 Feb 2020 00:24:41 +0000

This lawsuit has forced the legislature to re-write:

https://newschannel9.com/news/local/tennessee-lawmakers-look-to-change-sex-offender-legislation

“Under the amended proposal, convicted sex offenders could spend time with and live with their own child under 12, but only if a court hasn’t ruled they would present a harm to that minor.”

This (post-injunction) legislation looks much milder now. After all, in any state, not just TN, if a judge rules that an offender is harmful to a child, the offender ain’t living with that child, no matter what the legislature does, amirite?

By: Tired

Tired — Mon, 15 Jul 2019 12:08:56 +0000

Its a shame what this country has come to. Everyday I hear crying about people crossing the border and being separated from their children but as sad and true as it is we also are being separated from our children and not for something we did to them or something they were a part of. I fear riding to church with my grand daughter in the car so we take separate cars on Sunday. I am now selling my home where I can not live with my wife because of a city ordinance and moving to where we can live legally again after 7 years being released. To this day I cant wrap my mind around how I can be told I cant live in a house ive owned for 22 years now. I can see not being able to move somewhere but to be forced from my home and have to pay room rent somewhere and a mortgage.

By: gauloise perpignan

gauloise perpignan — Sun, 14 Jul 2019 00:50:49 +0000

If that is true, then why would legislatures draft and pass such a bill in the first place? The reason is that they are not running on facts.

We do not have rational legislators, rather we have amoral psychotic often alcoholic lawyers who got enough corporate funding to get elected.

By: WC_TN

WC_TN — Fri, 12 Jul 2019 23:38:36 +0000

My confidence in our chances for victory lies with the 6th Circuit ruling in Does v. Snyder where the Court overturned the retroactive application of newer restrictions that were enacted in 2006 and in 2011 and applied retroactively to registrants who were already on the registry prior to their enactment. Michigan petitioned the S.C.O.T.U.S. for certiorari, but the court declined, which made Does v. Snyder binding precedent within the 6th Circuit. TN is part of the 6th Circuit, so the retroactive application of this law SHOULDN’T stand a snowball’s chance in hell.

The prospective application is another animal altogether. There is a strong argument for the 14th Amendment (due process) violation of revoking parental rights via legislative fiat. This law preemptively revokes parental rights for applicable registrants who do not yet have children. This law says, “If you don’t have kids, don’t bother.”

The sole impetus behind this horrid piece of legislation is to discourage Alabama registrants from moving into Tennessee. Alabama law prevents sex offenders from living with their families even if their children were never their victims. 7 or 8 registrants moved into Giles County, TN so that they could live with their families like anyone else would expect to be able to do without government interference.

https://www.wkrn.com/news/local-news/giles-county-sheriff-sex-offenders-move-to-tennessee-for-lax-laws/

I’d be willing to bet there has NOT BEEN ONE SINGLE INCIDENT OF A TN REGISTERED CITIZEN WHO WAS ALLOWED TO REUNITE WITH THEIR CHILDREN ABUSING THEIR CHILDREN IN ANY WAY.