Epstein Secrets

pecialist TOTAL P.O? EFTA00177316 Case 9:08-cv-t -KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/1 38 Page 18 of 21 U.S. Department of Justice %sr United States Attorney Southern District of Florida 500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach. FL 33401 (361)8204711 Facsimile: (561) 820-8777 Jul

efore the Court on Plaintiff's Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victim's Rights Act (DE 1), filed July 7, 2008. It is hereby ORDERED that the United States' Attorney shall file a response to this petition by 5:00 P.M. on Wednesday, July 9, 2008. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach

RT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA NO. 08-80736-C1V-MARRA/JOHNSON 38 Page 1 of 1 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the United States of America's Motion to Seal its Response to Victim's Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victim Rights Act, filed July 9, 2008. The Court has carefully

Government claims is troublesome, the Fifth Circuit cited to the district coirt opinion under review, which had quoted all the words in the statute. See United States'. SP Peoducts, 2008 WL 501321 at *7 (noting victims right to confer "in the case"), cited in In re Dean, 527 F.3d at 394. The Government finally no

M Document 9 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/1 8 Page 5 of 17 As we understand the Government's response, it asks this Court to decline to follow the Fifth Circuit's holding and create a split of authority on this important issue. See Gov't Response at 2-3. Notably, the Government does not cite any cases supporti

A) merely confers federal jurisdiction on otherwise illegal conduct, SORNA does not require that defendant know that conduct is illegal under SORNA. United States v Torres (2008, WD Ter) 599 F Supp 2d 767. Defendant, who was convicted of sex offense under Uniform Code of Military Justice, was sex offender who

and verify their information, 42 USCS §§ 16914, 16916, there was insufficient evidence to transform SORNA from civil scheme into criminal penalty. United States v Mason (2007, MD Fla) 510 F Supp 2d 923 (criticized in United States v Muzio (2007, ED Mo) 2007 US Dist LEXIS 54330) and (criticized in United States

ty provisions, 42 USCS § 16913 and 18 USCS § 2250, respectively, exceed Congress's authority under Commerce Clause, that challenge was foreclosed by Fifth Circuit's Whaley decision; requiring sex offenders to register both before and after they traveled in interstate commerce--which clearly facilitated monitorin

s of his change in address after moving to Texas, requirement that he acknowledged receiving notice of, he would have been in compliance with SORNA. United States v Letourneau (2009, CA5 Tex) 2009 US App LEX1S 17349. Unpublished: Defendant was required to register as sex offender in Texas; additionally, defend

oss state lines and is authorized by Necessary and Proper Clause, U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, a 18; therefore, 42 USCS § 16913 is not unconstitutional. United States v Pena (2008, WD Tex) 582 FSupp 2d 851 (criticized in United States v Myers (2008, SD Fla) 21 FLW Fed D 473). District court treated 42 USCS § 1691

ty provisions, 42 USCS § 16913 and 18 USCS § 2250, respectively, exceed Congress's authority under Commerce Clause, that challenge was foreclosed by Fifth Circuit's Whaley decision; requiring sex offenders to register both before and after they traveled in interstate commerce--which clearly facilitated monitorin