Wisconsin Supreme Court grapples with ban on sex offender name changes
The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Thursday heard arguments in a case involving whether a transgender woman’s constitutional protections are implicated by the state barring her from changing her legal name to match her gender identity because she was registered as a sex offender as a juvenile.
In that case and on appeal, Ella, now 19, charged that requiring her to register as a sex offender under her male name given at birth violates her First Amendment right to express her true female identity.
Cary Bloodworth, an assistant public defender and member of the Madison-based nonprofit Community Justice firm, argued that, as applied to Ella, it is unconstitutional to require her to register as a sex offender because it forces her, including in circumstances where she has to use her ID, to speak and present a name that doesn’t match her gender identity, which amounts to government-compelled speech.
“Every time she uses that ID,” Bloodworth said, whether to travel on an airplane or buy Sudafed at a pharmacy, “she is speaking something that she doesn’t want to be speaking.”
Bloodworth maintained it is unconstitutional to essentially force Ella to out herself as transgender every time she uses her ID, which exposes her to harm and harassment. The government’s interest in tracking her as a sex offender is not affected because her alias is already in the registry, and that lack of negative affect is compounded by Ella’s low risk for re-offense, Bloodworth said.
OOPPPSS…. someone passed another law that didnt pass the sniff test..and here they are again… finding problems. that last part about how the name change doesnt matter because the new name is already in the registry. hhmmm Kinda reminds me of in the moving Blazing Saddles where the Governor is passing laws that only make the lawgivers feel positive. I hope it works out for the Wisc people.
What is this world coming to?
Before Florida banned Sex offenders from name changes, I remember when I was locked up. During the time I was locked up, I witnessed at least 30 people file for a name change. Some had converted to Islam in Prison and just wanted a more fitting name for their religion.
But some I wondered if they were changing it to put their past in the past, or to even cover up who they were one released. I mean on your criminal record, I think it would have a notation of your new name and your AKA but I could be wrong.
In Nebraska it is written right into the state constitution that the legislature does not have the authority to write a special law denying a group the ability to change their names I think this is true in most states. Nebraska Constitution Section III-18, Local or special laws prohibited.
The Legislature shall not pass local or special laws in any of the following cases, that is to say:
For granting divorces.
Changing the names of persons or places.
Laying out, opening altering and working roads or highways.
The list is quite long that the legislators have no authority over but these are the first three top things It would seem that once again legislators have crossed over there constitutional authority making laws that deprive a specific group of their rights Violating the ban on special or local laws as well as the United States Constitution on the band of bills of BILLS of ATTAINDER
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_legislation
Special legislation is a legal term of art used in the United States to refer to legislation that targets an individual or a small, identifiable group for treatment that does not apply to all the members of a given class.[1] A statute is often called special legislation when it targets a named person, but the term can also be applied to legislation that singles out an association or corporation.[2] Although a prototypical special law applies only to a single particular person or entity, legislation is often considered special when it applies to a small group of people or other entities.[3]
Special legislation can be used to place burdens on or grant benefits to identifiable individuals. During the Confederation Period, bills of attainder, the most well-known type of special legislation, were enacted by state legislatures to punish individuals suspected, but neither charged nor convicted, of a crime.[4] Special legislation was also used during this period to grant benefits to identifiable individuals, including monopoly rights and exemptions from generally applicable laws.[5]
Legislatures still enact special laws that grant special burdens or provide special benefits to individuals; however, the most well-known type of special law, the bill of attainder, has largely disappeared. One recent group of state special laws grant special privileges to Tesla, permitting them to sell electric cars directly to consumers under circumstances prohibited to other consumers.[6] Other modern special laws apply to a particular city or county. These laws are often called local laws.[7]
Special laws are often criticized because they reflect the corruption of the legislative process, a lack of deliberation on the part of legislatures and because they lead to unjustifiably unequal treatment and allow the legislative branch to encroach on the powers of the executive and judicial branches. However, they are sometimes defended on the ground that they can address problems created by generally applicable laws or cure local problems that call for a local solution.[8]
Most states have constitutional restrictions on some types of special laws. Most state constitutions prohibit special legislation related to certain enumerated subject matters, including prohibiting special laws granting divorces, changing names, and altering court rules.[9] Most other state constitutions provide that the legislature may not pass special laws when a general law can be made applicable.[10] A few states allow special legislation, but only of the legislature follows certain special procedures, like providing notice and a chance to object.
Under the United States Constitution, the modern Supreme Court has not recognized a constitutional prohibition on special legislation. Nevertheless, some scholars have argued that the text and historical background of the Constitution suggests that the Constitution should prohibit some types of special laws.[11]
Special legislation is closely related to what in the United Kingdom are called special or private acts.[12]
How many registrants who changed their names went out to commit more sex crimes? My guess rhymes with hero, so that’s zero. Do Politicians change their names when they sponsor bad bills or pass bad laws? No they think destroying millions of lives doesn’t matter; however when they reach the Golden Gates they will receive their Go to Hell collecting the flaming lake of fire. Politicians and judges should stop labeling people with words that doesn’t describe most of the group. Most registrants are law abiding and are moving on with life; so they aren’t offenders, they offended sometime in their Past. Judge people for who they are today otherwise take a seat at a curb with the rest of the garbage.