RSSUS District Judge Susan Illston Blocks Democratic Process sides with Sex Offenders … CA Prop 83 Blocked .. Law Against Sex Offenders
The protection of our children against sexual predators should be an issue that all political parties can
stand behind. If they don’t, they have some major explaining to do, to “We the People”.
One day after the midterm elections … a proposition in California that was passed 70.5% to 29.5% that restricted sex offenders, a CA US District Judge blocked the law. Elections do matter folks. Who do you thinks appoints these judges? Hint … The President of the United States. Here is another hint to who appointed this one.
It’s happened again. This time in California where judicial activism from the bench circumventing the will of the people. US District Judge Susan Illston blocked the passage of Prop 83 because she stated, the measure is overly punitive and prevented it from going into effect.” We the people is still supposed to mean something in this country.
The protection of our children against sex offenders should be the one issue among all issues that has no political slant. It should not matter that we are Republican, Democrat, Independent, Libertarian, Green, Conservative or Liberal … everyone, one would think would want to do everything humanly possible to protect our children.
Alas, that does not seem to be the case. We are constantly having the Democratic process of voting for issues and propositions over turned by a liberal court judicial activism. One really begins to wonder what they are thinking? This is just wrong. Wendy Murphy, child rights advocate, will be one of Dana Pretzer’s guests tonight on the Scared Monkeys Radio starting at 8:30edt. I am sure she will have plenty to say about this and much more when it comes to some of the insane rulings made recently in sex offense cases.
Read the full story that will make your blood boil at Missing & Exploited.
Posted November 9, 2006 by Scared Monkeys Child Welfare, Judicial, Politics, Sex Offender, WTF | 12 comments |
If you liked this post, you may also like these:
Comments
12 Responses to “US District Judge Susan Illston Blocks Democratic Process sides with Sex Offenders … CA Prop 83 Blocked .. Law Against Sex Offenders”
Leave a Reply
I pray she has no children,or friends who suffer from these creatures.Joe
Why have a proposition on the ballot that will not be upheld?
Does not surprise me in the least. How much you wanna bet the backlash from the voters will get her to unblock it and fast?
I certainly hope so… afterall, we have enterred a new age
where sex offenses isn’t just someone standing in their
living room with the curtains open. We have found due to
the diligent work by thoses that truly care, that there are
cyber-optic sites being expanded everywhere that are not only used as a means to expose oneselves to the public, but also to rape our men, women and children.
These people have made huge investments in rallying the
constitutionality of privacy and then distort the minds
of every living thing with their filth. They are enslaving
the unsuspecting and torturing (possibly killing) their
victims as we speak. If they have taken such drastic
measures to protect themselves and their rights; shouldn’t
we have the right to do the same?????? I think so……
I mean, really, is it too much to ask that they stay away
from our schools and parks, where our children tend to
congregate? This is rediculous. We NEED to do alot more.
I think the judge is right to deny this law. To me it sounds kinda unconstitutional (or at least that is how it most likely would be seen in my country, not sure about the US).
Demanding these kinds of rules/laws while they are still under probation/parole would be fine IMHO. But when a suspect has done his time, served his probation and did his parole then his punishments ends.
That people remain monitored for ‘LIFE’ is nothing less than big brother come to life.
One way around this is of course to seriously increase the parole/probation time to 10 or 20 years after release from prison.
and yes, Clinton might have nominated her. But it was the republican held congress that approved her nomination.
sorry, republican held senate that confirmed her.
#6; You mean Clinton did NOT know what he was doing when HE NOMINATED HER??!! I guess the Republicans in Congress should have played obstructionist politics with Clinton like the Dems have with Bush.
No Ramlady!!! He knew what HE was doing… he just didn’t
know what SHE would do. The President is always going to
look for judges that uphold the Constitution as that is
truly, the law of the Federal Government. However, a problem like this should not be handled by that kind of
judge and HOW it got there, I haven’t a clue… and so fast?
Where is this????? CALIFORNIA… what else need be said.
This is Hollywood, Baby. Nothing get’s passed the pervert
test. If it’s not goooooood for our perverts, the
scummiest of them all, then it’s not right for us. We’re
denying them their rights… as if they are not lucky to be
alive.
That’s EXACTLY what they told San Francisco and look at
them. Not just a few perverts here and there, perverts
EVERYWHERE.
California, YOU need to SPEAK UP!!!!!
Who exactly, is in control of your Parole board and your
law enforcement??? Certainly not the Federal Government!
Unconstitutional, my **s. It’s been VOTED on by the PEOPLE.
Yep….. the Constitution was written a very long time ago.
It’s not written in stone. If the Constitution is wrong
then we need to CHANGE it. There were never perverts raping
everybody back then and, quite frankly, they interfere with
my Constitutional Right to be free. Somebody needs to ask
that Judge if she would feel “free” walking on the empty
streets of San Francisco, Los Angeles or San Diego at night.
Ask her if she fears the Boogeyman, if not then someone must
atleast tell her about the BIG BOOGEYMAY that haunts us day
and night.
America, Your People are Scared…
Arn’t they a threat to us all????
It is very sad that we pass laws so punitive and at the same time very Ambiguous in the explaination of who will be screwed this time. This so called sex offender law that the voters passed was, I am sure never read by those whom passed it. Yes, we need to protect our children from preditors, but why do we always use a blanket explaination for these people when we don’t even know if they are preditors? Please walk a mile in their shoes before passing such harsh judgement.
Prop 83 is a terrible law. It was and is unconstitutional. It was poorly written and designed. It punishes people for past mistakes and further harresses those who are just trying to get on with their lives as best they can. It’s overkill for a state who already have Meagans Law. I say Get rid of Prop 83 for good, and lets fix any problems we have with the current law before we start a national witch hunt on alleged Sex Offenders.