Comments on: Non-delegation Doctrine in Sex Offender Cases Relisted

By: JLL

JLL — Fri, 15 Nov 2019 23:50:28 +0000

In reply to Michael Pierce. They already know these are the top legal minds in the world. We gotta poke holes.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Fri, 15 Nov 2019 12:04:17 +0000

In reply to Michael. The issue needs to be properly argued before SCOTUS. That hasn’t happened yet.

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 15 Nov 2019 03:13:59 +0000

It’s my basic understanding that the scotus should only be deciding these cases based upon evidence, and legality. So if the evidence says one thing, why are they following the “feelings based” way of things. Society feels a group is bad, so they just must be. It’s so frustrating to have to live this life.

By: David

David — Fri, 15 Nov 2019 00:45:53 +0000

Here is a link to some cases regarding SORNA,
http://jaapl.org/content/41/2/308

By: Biol57

Biol57 — Fri, 15 Nov 2019 00:09:12 +0000

I am probably in the minority here but, given the strong tone of the dissent by Gorsuch that was joined by the Chief Justice and Thomas along with some leanings by to reconsider by Alito make me hopeful.

By: JZ

JZ — Thu, 14 Nov 2019 23:44:44 +0000

So if Gundy is reheard, Kavanaugh will be included this time. If Gin$burg is too $ick to participate, we could have a more favorable outcome.

By: beefstew327

beefstew327 — Thu, 14 Nov 2019 23:38:12 +0000

These Judges need to take back their power from these Political ambition people. If a person was sentence. You can’t go down the road 7 years later and add to a punishment then call it civil or whatever you dressed it to look petty on the books. What happen in the past should done with once and for all. Wake the F*ck up in Washigton D.C. Yeah I broke the law but Crap let me get on with my life too.

By: Senator Lauren Book Spreads Lies and Hate

Senator Lauren Book Spreads Lies and Hate — Thu, 14 Nov 2019 22:11:52 +0000

I can't speak for legal scholars BUT based on my observations combined with common sense I have personally lost hope. The SCOTUS isn't interest in facts so forget that hope. Their real job is nothing to do with justice, fairness or even reality if you get right down to it. Their job is social engineering using precedent to keep the trajectory going. Evolutionary psychology explains this form of social "shaming" and its function quite clearly. It is obvious that the label of "sex offender" was created to provide a group that can have hate focused on them to show what the government can and will do to those to step out of line. The lie of protecting children simply taps into the innate societal drive and is not (and never was) the real reason at all.

By: Michael Pierce

Michael Pierce — Thu, 14 Nov 2019 20:53:36 +0000

Question:
Are the justices of the SCOTUS aware of the inaccuracies and or falsifications of the information that was used to pass these draconian registry laws?
If not, can protesters march with placards displaying the lies used to pass unjust laws?
Can we force them to learn the truth?