Louisiana Attorney General seeks SCOTUS review of driver’s license branding.
The Louisiana Attorney General is asking the Supreme Court of the United States to stay the decision of its state supreme court which struck down the Louisiana Law requiring the branding of driver’s licenses of persons required to register as sex offenders with the label on the face of their licenses.
In 2017, a registrant was charged with altering his drivers license to conceal the words “sex offender” he argued that the requirement violates the First Amendment prohibition against compelled speech and won. The state appealed and lost.
Now the AG is moving the case over to the feds and asking the highest court in the country to stay the decision so that Louisiana can submit a Petition for Writ of Certiorari asking the Supreme Court to hear the issue. While the Supreme Court of the US grants very, very few such petitions. If they do elect to hear this case, it could have implications across the country in other states (including Florida) that brand registrant’s licenses. It might also go as far as having an impact on passport branding under International Megan’s Law.
You can read the filing here: Louisiana Emergency Stay to SCOTUS DL
If the writ is granted, we need to file MANY amicus briefs using empirical data.
I really hope SCOTUS does accept this case and perhaps it will lead them to begin reviewing all the other b******* that is dumped upon those of us forced to register. (Chief Justice Roberts, it ain’t just Smith v. Doe 2003 anymore!!).
** And, personally, I will be very pleased if it forces the removal of the IML unique identifier from my passport!
According to the Court assignments, this appeal would first be reviewed by Justice Samuel Alito. (I have no idea if that’s good or bad.)
Alito authored the court’s opinion in Packingham, including the parenthetical about restrictions and obligations on registrants whose sentences were served being a “troubling fact” not before the court at the time. Accordingly, I would prefer his initial review.
Kennedy wrote the opinion in Packingham. Alito wrote the concurrence.
If certi is granted it could side with Louisiana. Just as denial of certi in 2005 Doe V Miller ushered the rapid expansion of SORR throughout the Country. If SCOTUS was to deny certi, then Louisiana’s state supreme court decision would become precedent.
If SCOTUS was to act quickly before review in the Courts of Appeal that to me would be very concerning. Best outcome..Denial of Certi.
“Just another Jailhouse lawyer”
A denial of Certiorari sends a very powerful and loud message “We agree with the findings of the lower Court” In this instance Louisiana’s Supreme Court.
The reason Certiorari was denied in the Miller case, I believe, is because the “Right to Live where you want (you don’t) is not a Federal question. “The right (or freedom) to move at ones own inclination, to changes jobs and residences” is.
Semantics matter. These legal minds will split a rabbits hair. What does ‘IS” mean in contest of “does”?
It would be a MIRACLE if:
SCOTUS would take up the case for review and
SCOTUS having taken the case, reversed the branding of documents such as DLs or Passports.
SCOTUS will NEVER review nor will it EVER reverse anything that benefits citizens. The organism is ment to do the will of the States NOT THE PEOPLE.
If I had a million dollars I would bet all of it, that SCOTUS will not even hear the case. And with the 2 million in my pocket I would easily obtain citizenship in another place.
The US is no longer “The land of the free”, where a person can be free from oppresive forms of tyranny.
Yall need to wake up.
It certainly violates the court order that states no community or public notification in my case. FDLE doesn’t care because they know that as long as it’s on your license and you are on the website, you will almost certainly not be able to obtain employment that would give you the means to fight them.
Seriously i hope this gets heard. how great would that be to not have my passport have that scarlet letter on it every time i leave this country. If LA won the drivers license case why has no one in FL tried? seems there is precedent set in LA to argue
Thank you for posting this article. This case could be important either way.
Just look at all the lies about public safety.
“The decision below threatens irreparable public-safety harms: Louisiana now can neither protect its citizens from sex offenders by requiring them to carry a marked ID nor prosecute those sex offenders—like Hill—who fraudulently remove the sex-offender designation. Without this Court’s intervention, sex offenders can alter their IDs or forgo carrying them altogether. That makes Louisiana law enforcement and the public less able to identify sex offenders moving through the community, with potentially life-threatening consequences. Granting a stay, in contrast, maintains the status quo until this Court can consider Louisiana’s forthcoming petition. ”
Just search the document for the word safety, there are plenty more lies.
This language is just so transparently silly that I can’t imagine SCOTUS granting a stay. I am prepared to be disappointed, though. Whoever heard of someone removing “sex offender” from their license in order to commit a crime?
Jacob
It goes something like this, “Hey, let’s be friends. Look, I will show you my driver’s license to prove I am not a scary sex offender. Look no mark of the beast”.
I am waiting for all released inmates to get bar codes tattooed to their forearms to keep track of be scanned upon demand.
“I am waiting for all released inmates to get bar codes tattooed to their forearms to keep track of be scanned upon demand.”
They couldn’t do that, that’s considered “Branding” But they could require by law you wear waist bracelet micro-chipped, bar coded with large red letters “SEX OFFENDER”.
Removal, destruction, altering or concealment of “State property” would be a third degree felony punishable with a mandatory minimum sentence of 5 years imprisonment and $10,000.00 fine.
This statutory requirement does not create a new crime nor is the penalty impose punishment rather it is the legislators intent to create a regulatory sanction needed to protect the public from the “Sex Offender”
Replace the words waist bracelet with Drivers license.
Likewise, who ever heard of someone presenting their ID (emblazoned or not) prior to committing a crime!
For community safety, the public needs to know he was convicted of a sex offense before he buys a six-pack?? Before he cashes a check?? Before he has a document notarized?? Why?? And why the Hell does law enforcement need to know, so they can more readily harrass him??
(My employer reimburses me for mileage. Each year I and required to update my mileage reimbursement paperwork with a photocopy of my driver’s license, my vehicle registration, and proof of liability insurance. I’m sure having “Sex Offender” emblazoned on my DL would be just grand.🙄😩)
That is the dumbest damn argument I think I have ever read. All someone needs to do is a study on the rate of offenses before and after this law went into effect and I am positive one would find it hasn’t made anyone safer.
Bring it on DA. That doesn’t stand for District Attorney
This case, if it reaches SCOTUS, would be the parakeet in the coal mine for the dismantling of the John Walsh Crime Syndicate. If SCOTUS were to agree with Jeff Landry, our status as persona non grata would forever be confirmed. If SCOTUS were to agree with the Louisiana Supreme Court, the decision would be tailored so narrowly that it would only benefit the registrant or a select few.
I agree with Anonimous, Amerikkka is a police state. With the call for defunding police waning, it will only get worse as we slide toward a one-party totalitarian government.
If we are already forced into compelled speech, have no right of privacy, denied housing and employment, where do you think it will end? The answer should be obvious. Extermination or permanent incarceration.
The U. S. Supreme Court will of course deny Certiorari review. They have no other option, as their ruling would affect the entire nation granting by relief to third class citizens. It is always better to flood the lower courts in various states (so much for judicial economy) than to grant across the board relief to sex offenders.
David
I am going to make a comparison here that is not meant to be insensitive. If 100 people head towards the border of the U.S from Mexico, that is going to raise a red flag and many of them will be captured. But if they split up a mile apart they cannot all be caught.
My point is, even though more expensive, when we go for individual relief, we are not asking for the registry to be thrown out, we are asking for the registry to throw “US” out as an individual. We are seeking a divorce from its’ hold on us.
It is like we don’t raise any red flags as one person but when an entire group floods the courts, it overwhelms the system. Now am I saying we should stop these lawsuits in mass? Absolutely not. I am just saying it seems more wins seems to happen under the radar. The less you cost the government the more willing they are to be rid of you.
I just hope and pray that I am still alive to see some major victories. If not then I guess my death will be my only way off this Hell on Earth.
Has IML been tested in the courts? This arguments put forward in this case has implications for dismantling the branding in that context.
jz:
We don’t need anyone pushing crazy conspiracy theories. This movement needs people who can create cogent and meaningful arguments to support our position.
There are about 1,000.000 people on these various sex offender registries. Many more people are on drunk driving registries, child abuse and neglect registries, animal abuse registries and a slew of other registries. When they pass these various laws they limit these registries to “law-enforcement” agencies only. Then they expand them to include schools, day care centers, etc. When they run out of reasons to expand access to these registries, the next logical step is to make them public.
Look at Indiana. About a decade ago they expanded the sex offender registry to include all violent offenders so now it’s called the Indiana violent and sex offender registry.
Indiana created a child abuse and neglect registry more than 10 years ago. They knew it could destroy lives, so they set it up for “law enforcement” purposes only. They continued to expand who had access to this registry until they ran out of excuses for expanding it. In 2017, Indiana made it’s child abuse and neglect registry public. Eventually, all of these registries will be made public because the public “has a right to know”.
Now there are millions of people on these various registries and it is only a matter of time until they collapse under their own weight. By donating to FAC or other legal efforts, our hope is to end them in our lifetimes. We are not pushing to end the registry in our efforts because the registry will eventually come to an end. We are just pushing the process at a faster pace so registrants receive relief in their own lifetime.
@Detroit,
I’m not pushing anything, just stating my opinion based on my experience with the registry. Edward Snowden exposed the FACT that our government is spying on US 24/7/365. The “Patriot” Act is still in effect. When one political party controls the Presidency, Senate, and House of Representatives, that IS a one-party system.
We are sent back to prison for technical/administrative violations where we are very likely to be murdered by other inmates with the FDOC compliance, i.e. exterminated. We are civilly confined indefinitely based on thought crime, i.e. permanent incarceration. In MY opinion, anyone who believes the registry will ever end is living in a fool’s paradise. I do contribute to FAC, every month, and have contributed to the ACLU.
Agreed, JZ.
JZ
Everyone should watch the movie called Minority Report with Tom Cruise if you haven’t already. The basis was people were arrested for things they “MIGHT” do in the future.
@CJ,
Yes, I have seen it. Maybe our government did too and enacted the Walsh Crime Bill based on it.
Ottis Toole confessed to killing Adam, yet we are all paying for his crime, in perpetuity.
The United States of America is becoming a distopian society, it is becoming closer to what was represented in the book 1984.
I personally feel we’re already there. The process just hasn’t completed, yet.