The ABA Journal reports that a federal judge in Indiana has "voided a new state law requiring retailers to pay a registration fee in order to sell sexually explicit material." U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barke found the new law passed earlier this year by the Indiana General Assembly to be vague, too broad and potentially applicable against 'unquestionably lawful, nonobscene, nonpornographic materials being sold to adults.' The Associated Press has more.
The Salt Lake Tribune reports that a federal judge in Utah has ruled that a sex offender can ignore a new law that would require him to report his screen names and passwords for online social-networking sites. The judge ruled that the man can ignore the new requirement until the court determines whether it is constitutional. I haven't read the opinion, but the media description strikes me as an odd way to characterize the decision.
A former jail guard became the first person in Illinois to be convicted under the federal Adam Walsh Act, which makes it a felony to fail to register as a sex offender. A federal jury also convicted the man of destroying images on his home computers to thwart a federal investigation.
The owner of an Ohio adult book store is challenging a state law which she claims could label such retailers as sex offenders. The woman claims Ohio's law is unconstitutional because of its provisions requiring people convicted of selling obscene materials to register as sex offenders for 15 years. The store owner says the provision is an infringement on her First Amendment rights.
A former Indiana Republican Chairman has been "sentenced to two years in prison and must register as a sex offender after being convicted of criminal deviate conduct." Authorities say he performed oral sex on a sleeping man following a party at a home last summer. The man resigned after the charges became public.
A federal judge in Nevada issued a ruling which prevented a new sex offender law from going into effect until constitutional challenges are resolved. U.S. District Judge James Mahan noted a concern that if the law were to go into effect as planned, low-level sex offenders would be incorrectly and publicly identified when their information is posted on the state's sex offender web sites. The judge will hear arguments on whether the law is constitutional later next month.
@Utah email registry litigation.
Depending on the offense, under the law, all RSOs will have to provide passwords along with the online IDs, and/or a list of websites where they are registered: http://le.utah.gov/~2008/bills/hbillenr/hb0034.pdf
"(c) require that a sex offender provide to the department any password required for use with an online identifier. Passwords provided to the department may not be disclosed to the public...."
"(g) the name and Internet address of all websites on which the sex offender is registered using an online identifier, including all online identifiers and passwords used to access those websites."
Of course this applies to anyone staying in the State for 10 days or more.
The plaintiff filed pro se, but was granted counsel on June 30. Have to wonder where the Utah ACLU is.
Posted by: jjoe | July 05, 2008 at 12:03 PM