California Supreme Court Blocks California's Efforts to Enforce Proposition 83 and Considers Validity of Proposition 83's Residency Restrictions
In November of 2006, voters passed Proposition 83, which prohibits registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a public or private school or a park where children regularly gather. Federal judges ruled that the law only applies to offenders paroled since the November 7, 2006 election. On Wednesday, October 10, 2007, the California Supreme Court blocked the state's efforts to revoke parole for four registered sex offenders who currently reside within 2,000 feet or a park or a school. State parole officials planned to begin locking up parolees who have been released since November 7, 2006, who currently reside within 2,000 feet of a school or a park. The four men affected by the court's order argued that there is no basis for the new residency requirements to apply to parolees whose sex crimes did not involve children. None of these men's crimes involved children. In addition to blocking parole revocation proceedings against these four men, the California Supreme Court also requested written arguments from each side by October 31. The Court did not indicate when a ruling would be issued on the validity of the residency restrictions. The case is In re E.J. on Habeas Corpus, S156933, before the California Supreme Court.
