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