Friday, May 8, 2009

Court : No Limit On Predators

From David Porter in the Courier Post:
New Jersey's Supreme Court ruled [Thursday] that towns cannot ban sex offenders from living near schools, parks or other places where children gather.
The court struck down two municipal ordinances that restricted where convicted sex offenders could live, a ruling that invalidates similar laws in more than 100 other towns across the state.
The two cases, in Cherry Hill and Galloway townships in southern New Jersey, highlighted Megan's Law, which requires convicted sex offenders to register their whereabouts with law enforcement.
The broader issue, though, centered on whether towns have the authority to pass ordinances that may conflict with state laws.
In its 6-0 decision, the Supreme Court echoed a 2008 appellate ruling that sided with the plaintiffs. Justice John E. Wallace Jr. did not participate. . . .
Both New Jersey towns have ordinances that prohibit sex offenders convicted of offenses against minors from living within 2,500 feet of schools, parks, playgrounds and day care centers. In all, about 120 towns in New Jersey have passes similar ordinances.
The Galloway Township case involved a Stockton College student who had served two years' probation for criminal sexual contact committed when he was 15 against a 13-year-old girl. He was designated under Megan's Law as a Tier I offender, meaning he was considered to have the lowest risk of re-offense.
The township sent him a notice telling him he could not live on campus since his dorm was within 2,500 feet of a day care center.
The two plaintiffs in the Cherry Hill case, James Barclay and Jeffrey Finguerra, moved into a motel within 2,500 feet of Camden Catholic High School while they awaited approval for a new residence from their parole officers. The township found them guilty of violating the ordinance and fined them.
Cherry Hill Mayor Bernie Plat and the Cherry Hill Township Council were correct to back this local ordinance and enact it into law.
The New Jersey State Supreme Court's decision is an affront to every decent, law-abiding person and every parent. It is an outrageous decision and it demonstrates once again the danger of an out-of-control activist court that seeks to restructure our society. Disgraceful!

No comments: