On July 27, the US Marshals Service (USMS) issued a press release[i] celebrating the 15th anniversary of the passage of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act (AWA).
But the Act continues to be controversial. Many states find it confusing or expensive to comply with. And, arguably, the additional scrutiny it places on registered sex offenders has had no impact on recidivism.
The requirement under the Act to place teens as young as 14 on sex offender registries, as well as the requirement to classify Registered Persons by offense rather than by risk has added an extra burden to lawmakers. That may be why only 18 states, four territories and 136 tribes have been in “substantial compliance” with the AWA guidelines[ii].
Texas rejected the AWA because authorities found it would cost them only $2 million to take the federal penalty for refusing to adopt the AWA guidelines, but $39 million to implement them.[iii]
Even among AWA-compliant states, laws vary greatly and are no less confusing and complex than before they adopted the AWA guidelines. In Ohio, the first state to adopt the AWA, the switch from risk-based to offense-based classification placed three times the number of Registrants into the “Tier 3” category, the category associated with high-risk offenders. This was a direct result of the AWA guidelines; no additional crimes were committed to cause this change.
The Ohio Supreme Court later declared SB 10, Ohio’s AWA compliance law, was punitive and violated constitutional protections against retroactive laws.[iv] As a result, Ohio has two separate registry guidelines, one for those convicted before January 1, 2008, and the other for those convicted after January 1, 2008.
Ohio wasted about $10 million in taxpayer dollars to defend this controversial law in the courts.[v] Ohio’s sentencing commission has since recommended Ohio return to a risk-based classification system, which would bring the state out-of-compliance with the AWA.[vi]
The act of granting registry compliance enforcement powers to the US Marshals Service (USMS) is a problem overlooked even among critics of the federal registry laws. Section 142 of the AWA allows for federal resources, including the USMS, to be used assist jurisdictions in locating and apprehending those who fail to register.
Perhaps one reason why this practice is not heavily scrutinized is because it has become commonplace.
In the USMS press release, the Marshals boast of conducting over 4,000 compliance check operations on over 634,000 Registered Persons, arresting over 41,000 Registered Persons for “Failure To Register” (FTR) and over 5,000 for AWA violations.
According to the 2020 USMS annual report, the USMS still conducted 281 operations, involving 52,738 individual compliance checks during the pandemic.[vii] They are sometimes given names like “Operation Jessica”[viii] or “Operation River Valley Chill”[ix] and make local headlines, giving the appearance the public is somehow safer because the USMS are arresting people for failing to fill out some government paperwork.
However, a 2009 study found no correlation between failing to register and recidivism.[x]
Compliance checks are unnecessary and unconstitutional. They are often used by members of law enforcement as intimidation tools. As a Registered Person who has endured multiple compliance checks, I argue they should be declared unconstitutional.
At the least, the USMS should not be a part of these harassment campaigns.
In 2013, I was sitting down to my dinner table when I hear a loud bang on my door, as if someone was trying to break into my apartment. Upon opening the door, I was accosted by a US Marshal decked out in full riot gear, accompanied by a standard county deputy who looked like he wanted to be anywhere but my apartment at the moment.
The Marshal demanded to see my bedroom to confirm I lived there. I asked for a warrant. He told me he didn’t have one, so I refused entry. He threatened to return next week, so I replied if he doesn’t bring a warrant, he’ll still be denied entry.
After some rude words and gestures were exchanged, I slammed the door in his face. He did not return. Later in the week, the local news boasted of one arrest of a registrant for possessing firearms as the centerpiece of a compliance check the local sheriff has called “spring cleaning.”
I sued the US Marshals for harassment. I wanted to argue before the courts that the US Marshals Service is conducting a state-sponsored harassment campaign and that compliance checks themselves constitute a search that demands a warrant.
Though it failed, a subsequent compliance check did not try to intimidate me or ask to see my bedroom. I still refused to cooperate with them and demanded they leave.
Other than annoy me and make me angry and bitter at being forced to register, what purpose did this compliance check serve? A person desiring to reoffend will do so regardless of public registry or laws designed to make the lives of Registered Persons insufferable.
Most sex crimes occur at home, by someone the victim knows, and most sex offense arrests are of people with no prior sex offense record.[xi] Few on the registry reoffend, and a Registered Person is far more likely to be arrested for an FTR than for a new sexual offense.[xii]
Jill Levenson, a well-known scholar on sex offender issues and currently a professor at Barry University in South Florida, wrote in 2009:
Employment problems experienced by the RSO [Registered Sex Offender], and subsequent financial hardships, emerged as the most pressing issue identified by family members. The likelihood of housing disruption was correlated with residential restriction laws; larger buffer distances led to increased frequencies of housing crisis. Family members living with an RSO were more likely to experience threats and harassment by neighbors.
Children of RSOs reportedly experienced adverse consequences including stigmatization and differential treatment by teachers and classmates. More than half had experienced ridicule, teasing, depression, anxiety, fear, or anger. Unintended consequences can impact family members’ ability to support RSOs in their efforts to avoid recidivism and successfully reintegrate.
Fifteen years of state-sponsored harassment and intimidation of those who completed their sentences is nothing to boast about.
Derek W. Logue is a Nebraska registrant and activist for the rights of returning citizens, and founder of the sex offense education and reform website OnceFallen.com.
ENDNOTES
If you look closely at the photo of Bush signing this evil law into existence, you’ll see Mark Foley standing there, just a few months his own little teen page scandal became headlines. Walsh himself started dating his wife when he was above the age of consent and she was below the age of consent, and had it been pursued the manner many similar actions are prosecuted today, Walsh could have been on the registry. John Walsh should be ashamed that his son’s name was used to destroy millions of lives, but he has always been about no one but himself.
Law enforcement should be de-funded in every possible way. They didn’t create the worse than worthless registries, but they support them and they could virtually ignore them. Instead, they waste and harass. Law enforcement are worse criminals than just about anyone list on their big government oppression registries. People who are listed on these registries have an obligation to ensure the registries do nothing useful and cause as much harm as possible. Big government is always running wars against Americans. They have been losing consistently and this is a war where they must suffer devastating defeat and consequences. All who support the registries need consequences.
Women Against Registry advocates for the families who have loved ones required to register. There are over 917,000 men, women and children (as young as 8 and 10 in some states) required to register. The “crimes” range from urinating in public (indecent exposure), sexting, incest, mooning, exposure, false accusations by a soon-to-be ex-wife, angry girlfriend, or spiteful student, viewing abusive OR suggestive images of anyone 18 years old or younger, playing doctor, voyeurism, prostitution, solicitation, Romeo and Juliet consensual sexual dating relationships, rape, endangering the welfare of a child, the old bait-n-switch internet stings (taking sometimes 12 months before a person steps over the line) guys on the autism spectrum or with intellectual disabilities and many others. Multiply that number by 2 or 3 family members you can clearly see there are well over 3 million wives, children, moms, aunts, girlfriends, grandmothers and other family members who experience the collateral damage of being murdered, harassed, threatened, children beaten, have signs placed in their yards, homes set on fire, vehicles damaged, asked to leave their churches and other organizations, children passed over for educational opportunities, have flyers distributed around their neighborhood, wives lose their jobs when someone learns they are married to a registrant. Academics and researchers indicate 3 things are needed for successful reintegration; a job, a place to live and a “positive” support system. Banning a registered citizen from drug treatment centers is not positive support. The Supreme Court’s Crucial Mistake About Sexual Crime Statistics – ‘Frightening and High’ (Debunks the high recidivism rate cited by retired SCOTUS Justice Kennedy and current Chief Justice Roberts) It is very important that you read the abstract below and then the full 12-page essay by Ira Mark and Tara Ellman. ABSTRACT This brief essay reveals that the sources relied upon by the Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe, a heavily cited constitutional decision on sexual offense registries, in fact provide no support at all for the facts about re-offense rates that the Court treats as central to its constitutional conclusions. This misreading of the social science was abetted in part by the Solicitor General’s misrepresentations in the amicus brief it filed in this case. The false “facts” stated in the opinion have since been relied upon repeatedly by other courts in their own constitutional decisions, thus infecting an entire field of law as well as policy-making by legislative bodies. Recent decisions by the Pennsylvania and California supreme courts establish principles that would support major judicial reforms of sexual offense registries, if they were applied to the facts. This paper appeared in Constitutional Commentary Fall, 2015. (Google Frightening and High). [This comments has been edited for spaced. Readers wishing to get access to the papers mentioned sbover should contact the poster]
Robin Richars on August 7, 2021 1:26 amThis is the best news ever. The amount of suffering is overwhelming. This has got to be turned around. Can’t we do a class action suit. Everything mentioned was spot on.
Actually yes aclu has sued Michigan 3 times and now has started a new fourth class action lawsuit. We won expost facto but the legislature only re worded the registry. Our state is over bloated. The only thing they did positive is eliminate the school zones because there is no threat. Look at how many school shootings we have and there not sex offenders, look at who gets convicted people you wouldn’t expect because there not on it. I tell my kids to be careful around teachers, police, fire fighters, church members, and public officials like Biden. They are breaking the law daily.
Imagine a state that decided to do away with the registry. Instituted either life without parole for the worse rapist and 100 percent sentencing and not eligible for an early release and not eligible for parole. The registry doesn’t make anyone safe. It harms the homeless innocent people. It makes convicted Sex offenders into angry people where they commit murder to simply go back to prison rather than be on some registry. We can take off the streets the worse sex offenders titled tier 3 on the registry since they are on there for life unless evidence proves they were innocent the entire time and return them to prison or be placed in some institution if they still have urges to commit another rape.
levon watts kirk on November 11, 2021 1:03 pmImagine going to an adult party after 12am where they had kids … Before the am you in jail for 2 counts of child molestation an they tell you they trying to add more counts (5) for every child that allegedly heard me say something to a minor…Fourty (40) years if i go to court..Six (6) months jail time serve, Ten (10) yrs. probation if i plea…This plea was on the table less than a week after i was arrested…I refused for way over Six (6) months before i took the plea….Almost 20 yrs. ago.Today im Classified as a Tier #3 offender sexual predator..I have never had a sex charge before that or after….The public defender tells me after the plea had you been able to bond out most likely they would have dismiss the case…Legal attorney tell me it’ll cost ya money but this is not a case….
DJ Clark on February 22, 2022 12:14 amI find it very funny that a sex offender is complaining about this. to be fair most sex offenders should never be let out of prison if we did that we wouldn’t need the list.
You don’t understand how the criminal justice system actually works. It is not a place to lock up “dangerous” people until they are “no longer dangerous”, it is a place to serve a specific punishment. There is a range of punishments for a crime, and when someone reaches the end of a sentence, that person is released regardless of perceived dangerousness. Thus, your statement is nonsensical.
how would you feel if it was one of your children or grandchildren who caught a sex charge and had to do all of the nonsense. cant get a job after release because of background checks. a murder or habitual offender when done with parole can go about life as if nothing has happened ! people always say it will never happen in my family and when it dose there attitudes changes
Sex offenders that’s re offense should never b released from prison. And not those that dint commite the offense initially but they pleaded guilty just for them to be free from parole. Why hurting or counting everyone that gets close to a child without no harm a sex offender. It’s not fair
Absolutely ludicrous thinking that offenders should be incarcerated forever. I’m sure you’re joking. How about all people who have broken a law and become a criminal be incarcerated forever? Let’s get a registry for each type of crime committed. Let’s get a Thievery/Robbery List, Adultery List, Fraud List, Assault/Battery List, Drug Offender List, etc. Thieves can no longer enter a store or purchase an item in person, must be done online. Fraudsters can only use cash and have no credit. Batterers must avoid contact with all people since either an adult or child may be a future victim. Drug offenders must never take any medications again. If society kept criminals incarcerated forever, there wouldn’t be a need for any list, right?
