We are each children of the 1960’s. Things were different then, yet still the same as Jefferson’s time. The founders clearly understood that the powerful FED could quickly overwhelm state’s power. Megan’s law was interpreted as a state right by scotus but via the database use (for public safety) inextricably links it to the federal. The federal surveillance saints had much to gain collaterally concerning the ruling in DOE V ALASKA & CONNECTICUT their intention to utilize infrastructure in Saratoga Springs. See Robin if a state can make a man indentured to a machine (a database) then a FED can utilize the tool in an unfettered way. We both know registration is a direct assault upon plain liberty. Cleary it is repressive, retributive and intended to impose unreasonable restraint. Judge Biggs has the unenviable task of informing the North Carolina people again that they act unconscionable on a mass scale. Permission granted and approved by leadership.

I have noted that you give Mr. Roberts the benefit of doubt given his advocacy for Megan’s Law in Alaska case. I bet to differ, his statement merely turns the question on its head. Registration itself imposed the deprivation of remaining silent. The most important speech right. Furthermore, the laws are on their face applied to those already convicted. As far as I am concerned, Mr. Roberts is no friend to liberty itself. His appointment reflects poorly on our nation and is a product of influence by those who fear the power of social media which has the potential to upset their financial apple cart. Big data was the key to big money.

The public safety issue is a populists position not a constitutional conservation argument of question. After all, when didn’t European Aristocracy claim public benefit when beheading political rivals. Indeed quite the same fate as Saddam Hussein. Welcome to the new world order.