Lx
Some of us have been holding out breaths since 1997 when this first came out and we are turning numerous shades of green. Not sure how much longer some of us have left. Getting off the registry when I am sent off to a nursing home isn’t my idea of a victory.
I would like to have a few years of freedom. My Dad is in his 80s, all my other relatives moved away. If I was to get a failure to register arrest and end up back incarcerated, my Mother would be all alone.

Sounds similar to the foolishness that has been going on for several years in Michigan after the sixth circuit and effectively the Supreme Court of the United States told them that their sex offender registry statute was unconstitutional. Can anyone tell us that they’re not enforcing the old law while their allegedly trying to come up with a new one?

That is because the courts make these rulings but do not enforce them. How many times has someone been ordered to be released from prison pending a re-trial, only to not be released? I have seen that numerous times on the news over the years. The states know that so they buck the system and push the limits.
Like a slap in the face of justice.

There have been cases, on RARE occasion, where a judge who was close to retirement, reflected on some of the rulings he made and felt guilty and reversed, or had a re-hearing and change of heart.

I cannot quote a specific case but back in the past my lawyer mentioned something along those lines when we were going back before the judge for a reconsideration. Not only did that back fire, she used foul language at me and my attorney for daring to come back before her and challenge her authority.

Really do not know how she sleeps at night. That was 30 years ago. Just looked and she is STILL a judge. I would mention her name but then she would haunt my dreams so no thanks.

Well that is something anyway right? The courts did not just toss the case in favor of the state which often happens. sometimes just being able to be heard is the first step in getting someone to hear the facts and not just read an exhausting stack of filings.
Go team F.A.C

Correct, but the State’s request for a stay was denied, so things are moving forward on schedule.

My guess is the Pennsylvania legislature was given the change to change their law so the original SORNA and amendments only applied on the date they were passed into law and forward in time, not backwards. They obviously didn’t do that and the court is saying no again.

Maybe one of these Supreme Court justices near death will have a revelation and finally step up

That’s what I thought. That is not uncommon, but I wonder how they can do that in light of this most recent decision?