A Mixed Bag: Challenge to Florida’s “SEXUAL PREDATOR” Driver License Branding Dismissed—But Not on the Merits
The U.S. District Court has ruled against the plaintiff in a challenge to Florida’s requirement that the words “SEXUAL PREDATOR” appear prominently on the driver’s licenses of individuals designated as sexual predators. Bad news for this Plaintiff, obviously, but it’s not quite as bad as it seems.
The plaintiff, Lane Kirkpatrick, argued that forcing him to carry and present a driver’s license branded with “SEXUAL PREDATOR” violates the First Amendment by compelling him to communicate the government’s message every time he shows his ID. The State argued that he didn’t even have standing to bring the lawsuit. The court disagreed.
In fact, the judge found that Mr. Kirkpatrick did have standing, recognizing that he had presented evidence of real injuries, including a canceled hotel reservation, lost work opportunities, additional TSA screening, and the stigma he experiences whenever he has to present his license. The court also acknowledged that even a temporary violation of First Amendment rights is itself a cognizable injury.
So why did he lose? Not because the court decided the branding is constitutional. He lost because of the statute of limitations.
The court concluded that Mr. Kirkpatrick’s claim accrued when he first received a driver’s license bearing the “SEXUAL PREDATOR” designation in 2015. Because he didn’t file suit until 2023, the court held that his claim was filed too late under Florida’s four-year statute of limitations for § 1983 actions.
In fact, the judge closed the opinion by stating: “The Court makes no prediction as to the outcome of a challenge presented by a different plaintiff.” That is an important statement.
For those wondering what comes next, the opinion may actually point the way forward. FAC has spoken with an attorney for the Florida Justice Institute (who represented the Plaintiff). They are disappointed by the decision here, but not throwing in the towel by any means. If you are a person who was first issued a Florida driver’s license bearing the “SEXUAL PREDATOR” designation within the past four years, you would no have the same statute-of-limitations problem that prevented Mr. Kirkpatrick’s case from going forward. In other words, someone in that position could be a strong candidate to bring the very same constitutional challenge.
If that describes you and you are interested in pursuing such a case, please reach out to FAC. While we cannot provide legal advice or representation, we would like to hear from individuals who may be in a position to challenge this law before their limitations period expires and potentially make the introduction.
You can read the decision here: Kirkpatrick – Drivers License Case
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This is a response to Mr. D;
If that is your position, would you please be kind and explain in specific, who or which segment of the sex offenders population would be the only ones who can qualify, per your statement, to have the crime dropped off the criminal records. I would love to read your response.
I think this should go for all crimes across the board. After 10 years they should fall off your criminal record, as long as it’s not sexual predators, child molesters, Rapist, Murders and Serial Killers.
I never signed up to be a lawyer, a judge, or an executioner. Neither my military service nor any other profession I have held gave me the authority to fill those roles.
I believe we need people who can approach allegations and offenses of a sexual nature fairly and without bias so that every case is handled through the justice system—not ignored or swept under the rug, but also not decided by public outrage or personal resentment. That simply is not my role.
During my time in the Army, I helped pursue terrorists who committed terrible acts. Even then, I never believed it was my place to take out anger or seek personal revenge against them. My responsibility was to ensure they were brought before the appropriate institutions of justice. I believe the same principle should apply in every case: accountability through due process and the rule of law, not through personal vengeance.
But your entitled to your opinion too