James Richard Johnson, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Department of Justice, Defendant and Responde — Werdegar, J…

Summary

Justice Werdegar dissented from the majority's decision to overrule precedent holding that mandatory lifetime sex-offender registration for certain oral-copulation convictions, but not comparable unlawful-intercourse convictions, violated equal protection. She concluded that the precedent rested on sound rational-basis analysis and that stare decisis required adherence because the decision had not produced significant criticism, confusion, or adverse effects. Justice Liu concurred in the dissent.