Indiana Law Banning Sex Offenders from Social Media Sites is Unconstitutional
A group of registered sex offenders challenged the 
law, arguing that it was unconstitutional under the First Amendment.  The group argued that there is nothing 
dangerous about a sex offenders’ use of social media so long as it is not used 
to communicate improperly with minors.  
Further, the group contended that illicit communication makes up a 
miniscule amount of social media activity.  
The district court upheld the law, finding it served a 
significant state interest and left open alternative channels of 
communication.  The court reasoned that 
the statute was narrowly tailored as “the vast majority of the internet is still 
at Mr. Doe’s fingertips.” 
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, holding the statute was 
unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds.  
Although the court found the statute to be content neutral, because it unnecessarily prohibited substantial amounts of protected speech, the law was overly broad and not sufficiently tailored 
to meet the state’s interest in protecting minors from harmful online 
communications.  Despite it’s holding, 
the Seventh Circuit made it clear that the Indiana   legislature was free to draft a new 
statute to address similar concerns, without offending the First Amendment.  Doe v. Prosecutor, Marion County, 
Indiana, No. 12-2512 (January 23, 2013).
Post Authored by Erin Baker, Ancel Glink

0 comments:
Post a Comment