Our pesky Constitution
A convicted sex offender says a new Utah law violates his right of free expression and his constitutional protection from unlawful search and seizure by requiring him to turn over to police passwords and other Internet information.That's Amendments One and Four, if you are keeping score.
A federal judge ruled the Clearfield man known only as John Doe, can ignore the new law until the court determines whether it is constitutional.
Doe says he served his time for the crime and Utah's new law— which requires residents listed on the sex offender registry to provide screen names and passwords for online social-networking sites— continues his punishment. (A possible Eighth Amendment violation: cruel and unusual punishment.)
Doe's suit argues:
Just because he once committed a crime does not mean he is still committing crimes.
2 Comments:
It all depends on whether or not the first and fourth amendments are individual or collective rights.
This law has little chance of ever protecting anyone. The registry only requires registered sex offenders to update registry information every six months, unless it’s a change in “primary residence, any secondary residences, place of employment, vehicle information, or educational information” in which case they are required to register within three business days. So registered sex offenders could just change the passwords or open new internet accounts the day after registering and still be in legal compliance with the registry requirements for up to six months. Also if someone was intending to commit a crime online, I seriously doubt they would use an internet account that they had on record with the State. Plus about two-thirds of the registered sex offenders are no longer on probation or parole. Therefore neither the Department of Corrections nor any other law enforcement agency can enter their homes to examine their computers and verify that they are complying with the registry requirements without a warrant.
Post a Comment
<< Home