PARSOL opposes the blanket use of residency restrictions and applauds the United States District Court decision in Fross v. County of Allegheny (2009), which affirmed that residency restrictions were contrary to state law because they hindered attaining the objectives of rehabilitating and reintegrating offenders and diverting appropriate offenders from prison by placing strict limits on the areas where they can live. In a September 2023 hearing, the PA House Judiciary Committee received testimony from PARSOL, the ACLU of Pennsylvania, Joseph J. Peters Institute (Philadelphia), the Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association, and the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing, all in opposition to residency restrictions, citing they don’t work, would be a logistical nightmare, increase homelessness, transience, and reduce employment opportunities.
September 12, 2023 Pennsylvania House Judiciary Hearing on Residency Restrictions
Related News Articles
- The Harrisburg-based Patriot News covered the hearing in their daily edition on 9/13. You can read the story here.
- The Capital Star also covered the hearing covered the hearing on their web edition on 9/13. You can read their coverage here.