<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Statement of JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR respecting the denial of certiorari.	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/</link>
	<description>Reforming Florida’s Sex Offender Registry Laws</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2022 14:04:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: CherokeeJack		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-3/#comment-48196</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CherokeeJack]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2022 14:04:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=17548#comment-48196</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I am starting to question allowing life time appointments for supreme court. Either way, you can gain so much power from knowing you can hardly be challenged on something. And once it is ruled, it is close to impossible to reverse.

Having said that, I was surprised when the abortion law was brought back up for another round of challenges. Depending on who you talk to, it is great news or horrible news.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am starting to question allowing life time appointments for supreme court. Either way, you can gain so much power from knowing you can hardly be challenged on something. And once it is ruled, it is close to impossible to reverse.</p>
<p>Having said that, I was surprised when the abortion law was brought back up for another round of challenges. Depending on who you talk to, it is great news or horrible news.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: TruthandScience		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-1/#comment-48195</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TruthandScience]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2022 09:05:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=17548#comment-48195</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-1/#comment-48177&quot;&gt;David <img src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/72x72/269c.png" alt="⚜" class="wp-smiley" style="height: 1em; max-height: 1em;" />&lt;/a&gt;.

David...I was not aware of Such Assignments.....Here is a Listing for all to know!



Per,  SupremeCourt.gov

Circuit Assignments

It is ordered that the following allotment be made of The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of this Court among the circuits, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 42 and that such allotment be entered of record, effective November 20, 2020.

For the District of Columbia Circuit - John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice

For the First Circuit - Stephen Breyer, Associate Justice
(Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island)

For the Second Circuit - Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice
(Connecticut, New York, Vermont)

For the Third Circuit - Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice
(Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virgin Islands)

For the Fourth Circuit - John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice
(Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Virginia)

For the Fifth Circuit - Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice
(Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas)

For the Sixth Circuit - Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice
(Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee)

For the Seventh Circuit - Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice
(Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin)

For the Eighth Circuit - Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice
(Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota)

For the Ninth Circuit - Elena Kagan, Associate Justice
(Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Nevada, Northern Mariana Islands, Washington)

For the Tenth Circuit - Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice
(Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Wyoming)

For the Eleventh Circuit - Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice
(Alabama, Florida, Georgia)

For the Federal Circuit - John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice.



............Notice that the Chief Justice Controls to Key Aspects: The Federal Circuit and the DC Circuit!........]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-1/#comment-48177">David ⚜️</a>.</p>
<p>David&#8230;I was not aware of Such Assignments&#8230;..Here is a Listing for all to know!</p>
<p>Per,  SupremeCourt.gov</p>
<p>Circuit Assignments</p>
<p>It is ordered that the following allotment be made of The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of this Court among the circuits, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 42 and that such allotment be entered of record, effective November 20, 2020.</p>
<p>For the District of Columbia Circuit &#8211; John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice</p>
<p>For the First Circuit &#8211; Stephen Breyer, Associate Justice<br />
(Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island)</p>
<p>For the Second Circuit &#8211; Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice<br />
(Connecticut, New York, Vermont)</p>
<p>For the Third Circuit &#8211; Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice<br />
(Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virgin Islands)</p>
<p>For the Fourth Circuit &#8211; John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice<br />
(Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Virginia)</p>
<p>For the Fifth Circuit &#8211; Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice<br />
(Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas)</p>
<p>For the Sixth Circuit &#8211; Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice<br />
(Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee)</p>
<p>For the Seventh Circuit &#8211; Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice<br />
(Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin)</p>
<p>For the Eighth Circuit &#8211; Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice<br />
(Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota)</p>
<p>For the Ninth Circuit &#8211; Elena Kagan, Associate Justice<br />
(Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Nevada, Northern Mariana Islands, Washington)</p>
<p>For the Tenth Circuit &#8211; Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice<br />
(Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Wyoming)</p>
<p>For the Eleventh Circuit &#8211; Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice<br />
(Alabama, Florida, Georgia)</p>
<p>For the Federal Circuit &#8211; John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice.</p>
<p>&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;Notice that the Chief Justice Controls to Key Aspects: The Federal Circuit and the DC Circuit!&#8230;&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: CherokeeJack		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48194</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CherokeeJack]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Feb 2022 01:34:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=17548#comment-48194</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Speaking of Justices
Biden just made his pick for Supreme court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/25/us/politics/biden-supreme-court-pick-black-woman.html

Source New York Times]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Speaking of Justices<br />
Biden just made his pick for Supreme court.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/25/us/politics/biden-supreme-court-pick-black-woman.html" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/25/us/politics/biden-supreme-court-pick-black-woman.html</a></p>
<p>Source New York Times</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Ed C		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48193</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ed C]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2022 05:08:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=17548#comment-48193</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48191&quot;&gt;Sc&lt;/a&gt;.

Yeah, the Supreme Court is most inclined to accept cert if the case 1) involves a split (disagreement) between circuit courts, 2) that it is an issue involving the U.S. Constitution, 3) is a spat between two states, or 4) a state case of U.S. constitutional dimension for which all state options have been exhausted.

This case only involved the state of New York.  Justice Sotomayer advised the state to resolve the issue in accordance with the Constitution, and signaled that at least she would be open to a later cert petition.  This is all very, very positive.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48191">Sc</a>.</p>
<p>Yeah, the Supreme Court is most inclined to accept cert if the case 1) involves a split (disagreement) between circuit courts, 2) that it is an issue involving the U.S. Constitution, 3) is a spat between two states, or 4) a state case of U.S. constitutional dimension for which all state options have been exhausted.</p>
<p>This case only involved the state of New York.  Justice Sotomayer advised the state to resolve the issue in accordance with the Constitution, and signaled that at least she would be open to a later cert petition.  This is all very, very positive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Sc		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48192</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sc]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2022 00:23:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=17548#comment-48192</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48191&quot;&gt;Sc&lt;/a&gt;.

&lt;em&gt;Fffff... Meant to put Comment, not opinion... Lol.&lt;/em&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48191">Sc</a>.</p>
<p><em>Fffff&#8230; Meant to put Comment, not opinion&#8230; Lol.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Sc		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48191</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sc]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2022 00:21:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=17548#comment-48191</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48188&quot;&gt;FAC Contributor #3&lt;/a&gt;.

Ah. Good catch, thank you for the correction and clarification!

I&#039;d also like to point out to those who aren&#039;t fluent in legalese that this Opinion basically outlines what needs to be done for a case (or cases) to reach the Court.
That is also a HUGE thing.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48188">FAC Contributor #3</a>.</p>
<p>Ah. Good catch, thank you for the correction and clarification!</p>
<p>I&#8217;d also like to point out to those who aren&#8217;t fluent in legalese that this Opinion basically outlines what needs to be done for a case (or cases) to reach the Court.<br />
That is also a HUGE thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Brandon		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48190</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brandon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2022 19:33:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=17548#comment-48190</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Now if only we can get a case in front of the justices to overturn Smith vs Doe destroying the registry.  I wonder how much work we have as far as justices to rule against the government.  I know Armoratto is out, I mean Alito although  he’s like a martini without the woman.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now if only we can get a case in front of the justices to overturn Smith vs Doe destroying the registry.  I wonder how much work we have as far as justices to rule against the government.  I know Armoratto is out, I mean Alito although  he’s like a martini without the woman.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: RM		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-1/#comment-48189</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[RM]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2022 19:18:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=17548#comment-48189</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-1/#comment-48177&quot;&gt;David <img src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/72x72/269c.png" alt="⚜" class="wp-smiley" style="height: 1em; max-height: 1em;" />&lt;/a&gt;.

All three states have &quot;registry lites&quot; so there may not be much to challenge. In New York, most reporting is done by sending in a form within 10 days of the relevant change. I think Vermont has 10 year registration for many/most offenses. And none of these three states has statewide residency restrictions.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-1/#comment-48177">David ⚜️</a>.</p>
<p>All three states have &#8220;registry lites&#8221; so there may not be much to challenge. In New York, most reporting is done by sending in a form within 10 days of the relevant change. I think Vermont has 10 year registration for many/most offenses. And none of these three states has statewide residency restrictions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: FAC Contributor #3		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48188</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[FAC Contributor #3]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2022 18:51:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=17548#comment-48188</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48187&quot;&gt;Sc&lt;/a&gt;.

SC, I just want to make a small clarifying comment to your insightful one. This wasn&#039;t a dissent. It&#039;s common for a Justice in the minority to write a dissenting opinion. It&#039;s EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY rare for a Justice to write a very long and detailed comment to a case which they decided not to hear. That makes this all the more special.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48187">Sc</a>.</p>
<p>SC, I just want to make a small clarifying comment to your insightful one. This wasn&#8217;t a dissent. It&#8217;s common for a Justice in the minority to write a dissenting opinion. It&#8217;s EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY rare for a Justice to write a very long and detailed comment to a case which they decided not to hear. That makes this all the more special.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Sc		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48187</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sc]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2022 18:07:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=17548#comment-48187</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48184&quot;&gt;Ed C&lt;/a&gt;.

@ Ed C,

Much agreed. The very fact that this was posted in the Dissent...

&quot; Courts,  law  enforcement agencies,  and  scholars  all  have  acknowledged  that  residency  restrictions  do  not reduce  recidivism and may  actually  increase  the  risk  of  reoffending.   For  example,  in  striking  down  retroactive  application  of  Michigan’s  residency restriction,  the  Sixth  Circuit  found  no  evidence  that  “residential  restrictions  have any  beneficial  effect  on  recidivism rates&quot;...

is huge and further, went on to acknowledge that the USSC will be addressing issues such as these without any doubt.

I&#039;m... Impressed, actually.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://floridaactioncommittee.org/statement-of-justice-sotomayor-respecting-the-denial-of-certiorari/comment-page-2/#comment-48184">Ed C</a>.</p>
<p>@ Ed C,</p>
<p>Much agreed. The very fact that this was posted in the Dissent&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8221; Courts,  law  enforcement agencies,  and  scholars  all  have  acknowledged  that  residency  restrictions  do  not reduce  recidivism and may  actually  increase  the  risk  of  reoffending.   For  example,  in  striking  down  retroactive  application  of  Michigan’s  residency restriction,  the  Sixth  Circuit  found  no  evidence  that  “residential  restrictions  have any  beneficial  effect  on  recidivism rates&#8221;&#8230;</p>
<p>is huge and further, went on to acknowledge that the USSC will be addressing issues such as these without any doubt.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m&#8230; Impressed, actually.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
