Pennsylvania vs. Toslieri Oral Arguments - MUST LISTEN

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Oral Arguments 5/23/2023. Right to Reputation. Aaron Marcus Attorney.

[@Tinman2955]

Anyone with two neurons that can communicate, can plainly see that it is a punishment.

[@Tinman2955]

They claim that it’s not punitive, yet they keep comparing it to whether or not executions are a deterrent. Defeating their own argument that it not punitive.

[@Tinman2955]

To the question of the judge in the second section about risk to reoffending. He said that a high risk doesn’t mean that they will but that they are more likely to. What can he base that on if not the recidivism rate?

[@vaporition]

yea, if it wasn't punitive, it wouldn't be a consequence of offense...

[@Tinman2955]

3 words, class action lawsuit. Against the state and federal government

[@Skipbo000]

Done and failed multiple times.

[@shanemontgomery1358]

Initial damage to the reputation is not the same as continued reputation damage

[@redeemingpatriot3487]

Facts people can change for the better and redeem reputation

[@shanemontgomery1358]

The admission that this is a law based upon consensus instead of evidence is telling isn't it?

[@davidro9883]

SCOTUS refuses to readdress the issue because they are well aware that their original determination is flawed as based on false information, as well as the fact that doing so would defeat SORNA.

[@redeemingpatriot3487]

Sounds like the registry is an unconstitutional ponzi scheme

[@Skipbo000]

How great to hear judges even having the conversation. But I am always disappointed when they get bogged down with trying to compare the registry with something else, in this case gun rights and trying to equate denying a gun to a person with a record against someone being forced to be on the registry. Since judges can’t seem to understand the difference, I’m not sure the point was made that when a person is denied owning a gun it doesn’t go against his reputation. He isn’t denied employment. He isn’t publicly labeled a dangerous sex deviant by the government. He has no other rights denied him other than owning a gun. The litany of life altering, damaging, humiliating things that happen to a person for the rest of his life when put on a registry is what makes this different than anything other thing in the justice system or in our culture. It is not like any other scheme so stop trying to compare it as though it were.

[@ivangreenhut]

the point they are making is if they side with him then don't they need to side with felons banned from a 2nd amendment right with no right to fight it. It's just as important a right and a very valid point. why should someone convicted of a felony tax crime not be able to own a gun? Why should he also not have a hearing to prove he's not a danger. I never owned a gun and don't give a rats ass. However those that are gun lovers are also deeply damaged in their mind. Thus they equally should be entitled to a decision of should they or shouldn't they be able to own a gun.

[@ivangreenhut]

for that matter, why should someone convicted of a single download of CP, not be able to own a gun? God knows we need them to protect our home from attack from being on a registry!

[@Tinman2955]

The courts need to see the difference between rights and privileges. We have a second amendment right. “Shall not be infringed” includes taking that right away.

[@Skipbo000]

@@ivangreenhut But it's not "just as an important right." Not even close. We're talking about people who, because of a government scheme that publicly shames people, can't work, can't date, can't engage in social media, can't go to church, can't see their own children at school, can't live in homes they own, can't travel freely, can't adopt a pet, can't stay in certain hotels, can't go on a cruise, can't turn their porch light on on Halloween, can't own their own business, can't create a new life, can't receive a state trade certification, can't have any other reputation other than that of a "child molester" (whether they are or they're not) for the REST OF THEIR LIVES. This issue isn't even CLOSE to the same thing as not being allowed to own a gun. This legal side tracking happens all the time and it causes judges to fail to fully understand the punitive, unconstitutional ramifications of sex offender laws. If these judges think that in order to relieve people from the government completely destroying their lives that they also must allow gun felons a chance to appeal, then they have totally missed the point.

[@popeyevalls]

well said.

[@Tinman2955]

We are American Citizens, we have the same rights as everyone else. We need equal protection under the law. If you do a background check on me, it comes back clean because my conviction was more than 10 years ago, what hangs me up when trying to find housing or a job is the “public records” check when they look at the registry. If you’ve done your time, your punishment should end period. And comparing it to parole, is flawed. People on parole are not publicly broadcasted, people on parole have not maxed out their time in prison, they were let out prior to the expiration of their sentences. Parole (or post release) is typically equal to the sentence.

[@ericmartinez5475]

Completely right same happening to alot of us.

[@Skipbo000]

Newsflash: your record is not "clean." Of course i know what you're saying but your presence on the registry IS a part of your background check. Yet another example of how we are treated so unequally.

[@ericmartinez5475]

I have a question bc my conviction was more than 10 years ago and they still denied me jobs and housing.

[@Skipbo000]

@@ericmartinez5475 Yes because denying you jobs and housing has nothing to do with your convictions. It has to do with your name on the registry.

[@KB-oh3hu]

What state are you in? Was your record cleared automatically after ten years?

[@cynthiarodgers774]

Laws should be based on facts, not fear. No labels, no lies. Walk a mile in someone else's shoes before passing judgement. Things are seldom as they seem, wisdom brings knowledge and understanding. Thanks for the education FAC!

[@redeemingpatriot3487]

I agree the rehabilitation should be based on facts not fear

[@ericmartinez5475]

I have a sex offense level 3 and is unconditional that the state is using falsely laws where isn't there at all. So needs to change before everyone that has been accused start suiying.

[@Skipbo000]

people have been suing unsuccessfully for years.

[@jefferyepstein9210]

What was the offense?

[@popeyevalls]

they would spend hours arguing how to screw in a lightbulb. Can a felon in posession of a firearm, install a lightbulb or is the felon's rate or risk of recidivism so high that he/she will have to be banned from any retailers who sell electrical equipment within 1000 feet?

[@jamesbeemer7855]

Ok , thank you . Um , I have a question . Um at present , an offender is catagorized by only one of three tears of dangerousness . Um , when we’re young , we make far more mistakes , than when we get older . Wouldn’t it be better if we could demonstrate our level of dangerousness to be less over time , because we’re older than when we were younger . This would eventually let us off the hook . But at present there is no relief from the registry what so ever . If Pennsylvania can do this modification to the law , the other states might follow . The idea is that by not doing anything to offend , the penalty can be reduced over time .

[@kenmaples6856]

Here's a simple solution. If a legislator lawmaker does not feel a statute regarding a sex offender is considered punishment then they should be forced to experience it. Walk a mile in someone else's shoes.... or in some cases ankle monitor. After a few months of keeping track of an ankle monitor, legislators might find that it is cruel and unusual punishment. Perspective is everything.

[@Tinman2955]

Where’s the audio after their 10 minute break? Did they make a ruling?

[@Tinman2955]

To the question of the judge in the second section about risk to reoffending. He said that a high risk doesn’t mean that they will but that they are more likely to. What can he base that on if not the recidivism rate?

[@redeemingpatriot3487]

Hes comparing people to others who have done it repeatedly without having reviewing the individuals history, contributions to the community and current activity

[@user-ld1ny2zh1s]

That's exactly what they are doing. They are saying once you did it you WILL do it again. Well guess what not true people do change there lives and make them better.

[@redeemingpatriot3487]

Not everyone is educated on what is hurtful these days

[@ericmartinez5475]

There isn't a due process he literally liying and he probably never got cought yet and his scared.

[@jefferyepstein9210]

How can anyone expect Pennsylvania to be fair after what they did to Bill Cosby

[@Transform108]

Basically the trial court used scientific evidence to question the PA legislators adoption of SORNA. The PA Supreme Court basically says that the Trial Court needs to look at this again with both sides of the scientific argument presenting. The Unconstitutionality portion is vacated for the time being. And the legislature basically can weight this too and even make a less informed judgement call... “the wisdom of a public policy is one for the legislature, and the General Assembly's enactments are entitled to strong presumption of constitutionality rebuttable only by a demonstration that they clearly, plainly, and palpably violate constitutional requirements.”

[@jamesbeemer7855]

I heard it , but the legalism gets in the way of my understanding . But I’m going to listen again .

[@popeyevalls]

they continuously interrupt Torsilieri mid-answer, everytime he discredits their argument. Torsilieri is a one man army armed with all the facts and the ability to disprove all their "from the hip" perpectives. Lets take a step back and assume one of these "genius" legislators committed a felony....would their constitutional rights, reputation, freedom or future be jeopardized? HELL NO.

[@davidro9883]

Why does the attorney keep going off track? He cites jay walker and bank robbers. This hearing is to address a specific issue, i.e., sex offender recidivism rates being high or not. Bank robbers, jay walkers and even murders are placed on a national registry!

[@hesuschrist9527]

What is a Sexual Offence in plain language aka layman Terms?? Maby that should be one of the Discussions?

[@Skipbo000]

any crime committed where a sexual component is involved. Also, sexual offenses mean different things in different states. There is no one single understanding of the term.

[@davidro9883]

Findings: mitchellhamline.edu/sex-offense-litigation-policy/wp-content/uploads/sites/61/2020/06/Trial-Court-Opinion.pdf

[@Tinman2955]

Yes! Hallelujah!

[@Tinman2955]

It is found to be unconstitutional and is in fact punitive! Per page 19!

[@Tinman2955]

Thank you so much for sharing this!

[@FamiliesForBetterFlorida]

"June 16, 2020".... this is only the trial court, right?

[@davidro9883]

@@FamiliesForBetterFlorida Appellate Court.

[@Transform108]

This is the PA Supreme Court Opinion mitchellhamline.edu/sex-offense-litigation-policy/wp-content/uploads/sites/61/2020/06/Pennsylvania-Supreme-Court-Opinion.pdf