Comments on: Religious establishment and improper delegation at the Supreme Court https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/06/memorial-cross-improper-delegation-double-jeopardy-at-the-supreme-court/ Chronicling the high cost of our legal system Mon, 24 Jun 2019 14:50:28 +0000 hourly 1 By: Hugo S. Cunningham https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/06/memorial-cross-improper-delegation-double-jeopardy-at-the-supreme-court/comment-page-1/#comment-355017 Mon, 24 Jun 2019 14:50:28 +0000 https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=73374#comment-355017 In reply to MattS.

In 2003, SCotUS embraced the fiction that Sex Offender Registries (SORs) were “nonpunitive” civil regulations, not covered by the ex-post-facto clause.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v._Doe
As SOR regimes have grown ever more punitive since 2003, some legal scholars speculate that SCotUS will eventually reexamine their 2003 reasoning.

]]> By: MattS https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/06/memorial-cross-improper-delegation-double-jeopardy-at-the-supreme-court/comment-page-1/#comment-354981 Fri, 21 Jun 2019 13:59:19 +0000 https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=73374#comment-354981 This case isn’t really just about the severity of the penalties under the sex offender registry. It’s about retroactive application of the registration requirement (the AG decided to require people to register who were convicted before the relevant federal law was passed).

Why wasn’t there an ex-post-facto challenge made in this case?

]]>