Excellent decision out of Alabama Federal Court
An excellent decision out of the Federal District Court for the Middle District of Alabama (which happens to be in our Federal 11th Circuit).
A copy of the decision follows and is shared in the interest of time – interpretation will follow.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Starting to turn around .good for fla. Case
Since this appears to be federal, does this mean a challenge will soon be filed in florida against the drivers license branding? Hell, your passports ARE branded now, if you can even get one. I owe child support that I’m catching up on for my time in prison that I couldn’t pay, so i can’t get one.
I can’t wait for the interpretation! Things got a little confusing for me.
I have been paraphrasing Thomas Paine for YEARS without knowing it! I have maintained that by making exceptions so they could apply laws to sex offenders, they were only establishing precedents to do so with other crimes in the future. (You know drug offenders have an extremely high reoffence rate, let’s make a law retro- actively apply to them, we have the sex offender laws as precedent) (and then it would only get easier and easier to do it again and again).
Jim I actually agree with you on this. Wow you have something there right on man right on.
I am confused as the findings seem to apply only to the plaintiffs.
Am I reading this correctly so that others in the 11th will have to file a motion in the courts to have these findings apply to each registrant, and does this apply only to Alabama or to all in the 11th?
From my understanding it only applies to those plaintiffs. Not the whole 11th circuit for sure as this was a Fed. District Court. If this gets appealed it could take years. Ie McGuire v Strange oral arguments heard in 2017 and still no decision. Hopefully this move the COA
Could this be approached as a class action suit where almost every single registrant in Florida sues because their driver’s license is “branded”?
The provisions are unconstitutional as applied to the plaintiffs. But since they are applied the same way to registrants throughout the state, they are automatically unconstitutional as applied to all (unless, of course, the state can successfully appeal).
” … twenty years is enough ”
First amendment, forced speech… Incoherent rules. I have a standing bet; if anyone can make heads or tails of FL residency definitions… I’ll hand over my pin number!
William,
The heads and tails of Florida’s residency definitions and restrictions is that registrants are in violation simply for existing, even when dead. Dead registrants are in violation for failing to update their status every year, particularly those buried in exclusion zones, which is pretty much everywhere.
You can keep your PIN.
It is a requirement by law for a relative to go down once a week for life and explain why the offender cannot show up to register. If that designated family member ie: you Grandmother, does not do this each week, they are charged and arrested with aiding an offender with absconding from justice.
Yes sarcasm but are we that far from that?
How Does FAC believe this will effect new or existing cases to Florida Regitrants?
Any win – especially one from a case in our circuit – is big. Anytime a judge puts into writing that there’s something wrong with this scheme, it’s huge!
Yes and now that decision has to be considered “persuasive” by other district courts in the 11th Circuit.
I find this part interesting:
“4. The State of Alabama’s branded-identification requirement, Ala. Code § 15-20A-18, is DECLARED unconstitutional as applied to Plaintiffs.”
That specifically refers to Alabama’s practice of labeling driver’s licenses with a sex offender identifier. Seems like it would apply to the Passport identifier at the Federal level as well.
Arizona requires sex offenders driver’s license to be branded also. How will this affect Arizona?
It is not binding precedent for Arizona. It is merely persuasive.
I lived in Az and I haven’t heard any thing about branding the Register citizens Driver Licence I have a licence myself once a year i get it updated. and go to Meeting of AZRSOL I haven’t it discussed here either @ Candice Please tell me where you got this information from?
I was told AZ. branded the licenses every year where they are renewed. I was also told only registrants have to renew every single year. If true this creates a burden that no one else has to go through.
If you live in AZ. maybe you can verify this. Is it true, if a registrant moves to AZ. and is a level 3 they will be put on the news that they moved into the area?
Please don’t quote me but I haven’t seen it happen,I am not saying it don’t happen I just never saw them station it here in phoenix Now Prescott and Tuscon might do it because I google that up. I wanna give you an honest answer here. If you interested coming to phoenix My landlady is cool!! I could give you her number because she rents to us register citizens the only problem is a waiting list she might make exception because you out of state. She told me to give out here number if someone looking for a place It is a very nice place. I pay 500. plus electric. Her others apts run to 580.00 to 600+ I live near I-17 and only 10 minutes from downtown Phoenix by car.
Just so I’m clear, I am not a registrant. I am just an advicat for liberty. I believe what they are doing is wrong and it’s only a matter of time before they do it to everyone. They do it to sex offenders to see what they can get away with.
I have been saying that all along. How come murderers don’t have to be on a registry? How come habitual car jackers don’t have to be on a registry. How come arsonist are not on a registry? I would live near 100 sex offenders before living next to one of the above. Not calling them out just stating the obvious. Start making a registry for bad judges. If we did that they would sue us for defamation but when they do it to us it is free speech and the law ? Gotta love the U.S laws and constitution.
At work so reading this is hard but if I am correct in my eagle’s eye is this ruling basically saying they can not brand Drivers licenses and compel online identifiers? If so how doesnt this stack against Delgado v Swearingen’s ruling in Florida. If I understand both rulings this appears to be a conflict that needs to be settled by the 11th Circuit.