Ex Post Facto Lawsuit Filed
A lawsuit was filed in Federal Court challenging the Florida Sex Offender registry. The suit is a facial challenge, filed on behalf of persons required to register in the State of Florida.
It argues that the registry violates the Ex Post Facto clause of the constitution, constitutes Cruel and Unusual Punishment, violates Procedural Due Process, violates Substantive Due Process, is unconstitutionally Vague, has no rational relationship to its purpose and asks the Court to permanently restrain and enjoin the FDLE from enforcing the registration statute.
This is the suit we have been waiting for!
FAC offers a special thanks to attorneys, Val Jonas and Todd Scher for bringing this case, to Beth Weitzner, Jeanne Baker and all the other attorneys who assisted in researching and drafting the complaint, and to all of our members who contributed to help make this possible.
A copy of the complaint can be found here: Does v Swearingen – Complaint
We will keep you apprised of the progress.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I love it ! Especially all the violations against registered citizens that it is covering ! Goodness pleaseeee give us this one!
Thank GOD – finally someone is stepping up to the plate on our behalf !! Thank you, thank you, thank you……
Good Luck Florida Sex Offenders on your Ex Post Facto Lawsuit
Oh man, if we win this one then wow ! It’ll probably be challenged on appeal of course, but hey, I like the SCOTUS panel we have today.
We have a few wins under our belt – the Internet Identifier order last month was a win. Our reversal in the 11th Circuit on our SORR case was another win. I’m proud of the strides made so far in such a draconian State.
Indeed FAC, we should all be proud and grateful ! and keep fighting the good fight !
Great news for Florida for sure! God knows they need it.
Yes !!! Finally ! Can’t wait for this.
This is Great ! Is this in similar fashion to the one in Colorado ? That one was an as applied challenge, this is a facial challenge. I know they are different, but I’m no legal language master here.
Same here, but I think the violation of Substantive Due Process as the posts says, covers the as applied challenge also similar to Colorado. Once again – I think.