Attacks on Constitutional Advocacy

Weekly Update 2018-03-23

Dear Members and Advocates,

We are (im)patiently waiting for two orders to come down from the court. One in our Internet Identifier case and another in a municipal residency restriction case. Yesterday, attorneys for the plaintiffs in the Internet Identifier case filed a “Notice of Supplemental Authority”, informing the court of a decision last week out of the Northern District of Alabama that supports our argument. In that case (Doe #1 v. Marshall) the court refused to dismiss a plaintiff’s First Amendment challenge, finding that the Alabama internet identifier registration requirement burdened the plaintiff’s free speech rights. That decision is in the same Federal Appellate Circuit as we are (the 11^th Circuit), so it should be persuasive. A decision in the municipal SORR case we are following was already rendered, but we are waiting for the opinion to be issued before disclosing details.

We are also waiting to see what becomes of House Bill 1301/Senate Bill 1226. Those bills will reduce the number of days you can stay someplace before having to register; from 5 days to 3. Effectively, if you stay someplace more than 2 nights in a calendar year, you need to register. The bill also imposes a mandatory minimum sentence of 6 months on GPS monitoring for any registration violation. Considering a number of counties’ registration offices are not open 5 days a week (and none are open on weekends and holidays), this will make it impossible to comply with in certain cases (no more travel on long weekends) and will severely impede travel for all people required to register. The GPS monitoring is another ridiculous measure and with GPS being notoriously faulty and problematic, we expect a violation snowball effect. As of yesterday, the status of the bills are “Signed by Officers and presented to Governor”. It’s highly unlikely this will not become law.

We have been speaking to counsel about how to address this and will be updating shortly. At minimum, the GPS component is a further compelling argument in our Ex Post Facto challenge. How can you argue that something is civil and non-punitive, when any technical violation carries a minimum mandatory criminal sentence? Our ex post facto case is expected to be filed in the spring.

Another case that was recently decided got our attention. Senator Lauren Book obtained a restraining order against outspoken reform advocate, Derek Logue. Although our methods are completely different from Derek’s, our objective is the same… to bring awareness to the truth surrounding our issues, so that we can bring about change. Part of that mission involves debunking false information and the loudest megaphones expelling that false information happen to be Ron and Lauren Book. While we acknowledge that Derek’s approach lacks refinement or sensitivity (and he will acknowledge the same), you must give the guy credit for putting himself out there when opposing Senator Book’s political views. That is why we were so surprised the Judge issued the restraining order. After all; the First Amendment guarantees the right of the people to peacefully assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances, right?

We figured out why the judge ruled against Derek after being supplied with a copy of Senator Book’s closing arguments. Those who had first-hand knowledge, know the events she described were grossly mischaracterized. If everyone who spoke out against or insulted a politician was hit with a restraining order, we would have no late-night talk show hosts. If everyone who rallied to protest their legislator’s position on matters critically important to them were “stalkers”, the students of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School would all be guilty. Which, speaking of… Senator Book referenced the Parkland shooting three times in her closing, trying to somehow correlate it to her case with Derek. A sad reach!

Also upsetting was Senator Book’s characterization of the reform movement and reform advocates as people “who are utilizing the internet to ‘incite others to act,’ in this case, ‘others’ being other pedophiles” and Derek’s “target audience being other like-minded sexual predators”. Sad for all of us in Florida who are her constituents! We don’t think it’s right when a politician uses their power to censor critics who jeopardize their self-dealing interests. That’s all the lawsuit was about! Despite having openly butted heads with Derek numerous times over the years, his site has become a valuable resource, his corrective comments to news articles are generally appreciated and we certainly hope the decision does not deter his activism or intimidate others into silence. It certainly won’t for us!

Sincerely,

SOME HEADLINES FROM THE WEEK

Operation “Southern Impact II” – what the numbers don’t tell.

Parents nationwide have been fed misleading headlines touting the results of operation “Southern Impact II” which purportedly “nabbed 76 child-sex predators” and in which “13 children were rescued or identified as victims”. Without more, those are some scary numbers…

WV: State Supreme Court Rules Probation Internet Restrictions Violate First Amendment

The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals has ruled that completely restricting a person’s access to the internet as a condition of their parole from prison is a violation of the First Amendment. Here is the decision:…

Alabama registrant violated because relatives came to stay with him.

An Alabama registrant, who spent 18 months in jail for a sex offense he was convicted of in 2000, is facing ten (10) years in prison. His “new crime”, minors, aged 11-16 were visiting his home! Sounds sinister? How about; the children were his relatives? How about;…

8 hit with registration violations in Polk County.

A headline in Today’s, Daily Ridge reads, “8 Polk County sexual predators and offenders arrested for failure to comply with Florida law”. We had to read the story to check out what horrible new sex crimes these guys were committing and, as expected, these were not new…