Comments on: KS: Kansas Supreme Court Reverses Convictions for Failing to Pay Sex-Offender Registration Fees

By: DVC

DVC — Tue, 25 Aug 2026 18:40:52 +0000

If this were truly a ‘civil regulatory scheme’, it would only have been deemed a fine as ‘true’ civil regulatory schemes impose for an infraction.
NO civil regulatory schemes impose criminal punishment for an infraction or violation-NONE!!
This should be called out in the courts!!

By: Eugene V. Debs

Eugene V. Debs — Tue, 25 Aug 2026 17:07:04 +0000

I imagine this is were it goes same as the JAG grants https://wpde.com/news/local/former-darlington-co-deputy-accused-of-taking-450-from-sex-offender-registry-payments

By: TS

TS — Tue, 25 Aug 2026 14:43:33 +0000

In reply to J. It is not LE that imposes them, but the elected officials who do that LE merely carries out. With that, your post is adroitly appropriate in its conclusion and provides good questions which should be asked of others.

By: J

Tue, 25 Aug 2026 13:05:55 +0000

My thoughts on the registration fee have always been that law enforcement imposes them unjustly and specifically as punishment.
They say the fees are justified because they are used to manage registration administration.

But the Adam Walsh act clearly states that it provides the necessary funding to manage registration in its entirety to any law enforcement agency that is in compliance with the Adam Walsh act.

So the only argument LE should have to support fees is that the Adam Walsh act is not providing the sufficient funds necessary. But if it is not providing the funds then why? Is FDLE not in compliance?
If FDLE is in compliance then any fees required from registrants are extortion and the registry is the racketeering scheme we have all been saying for years.

By: BWJ

BWJ — Tue, 25 Aug 2026 12:54:51 +0000

How are registration fees even legal in the first place?

By: Kurtis Roberts

Kurtis Roberts — Tue, 25 Aug 2026 12:25:43 +0000

Common sense here in my statel for once.