FAC Legislative Committee chips away at SB 212
Yesterday, several FAC members traveled to Tallahassee to speak before the Senate Rules Committee in opposition of SB 212. This is on top of hundreds of members and other advocates from across the country who have called and emailed Florida lawmakers to put a stop to two horrible bills, HB 45/SB 212, that are under consideration this year. The good news is our efforts are paying off!
Here’s where things stand: Yesterday, the Senate Bill sponsor amended his bill to make it a bit less radical. The prior version of SB 212 would have created an entirely new criminal statute making it illegal for certain people on the registry to simply be present at places like schools, parks, playgrounds, childcare centers, and public swimming pools. It set up a brand-new statute to criminalize presence alone, even without any wrongdoing. It also expanded residency restrictions and added very specific rules about what counts as a “public swimming pool,” reaching into many community spaces. In short, it built an entirely new layer of criminal liability on top of already existing restrictions.
The newer amendment takes a different approach. Instead of creating a brand-new criminal statute, it folds some of these restrictions into Florida’s existing loitering and prowling law. Rather than broadly criminalizing mere presence in certain places, the amended version focuses on prohibiting contact, communication, or intentionally approaching minors in parks, playgrounds, and pools. It also increases certain distance requirements and slightly broadens how public swimming pools are defined. While it still expands restrictions, it does so in a more integrated way within current statutes instead of creating a sweeping new standalone crime. In simpler terms, you can now go to places the older version said you couldn’t, you just can’t approach or communicate with minors (except your own family). It is still restrictive, but it is less expansive than what was originally proposed. You now don’t have to worry about eating in the wrong restaurant or going to a dentist too close to a day care, you just have to make sure you’re not approaching or talking to minors (which is good practice to avoid doing anywhere you are – for anyone).
The expanded residency restriction remains. The new amendment still restricts certain registrants from residing within 1,000 feet of restricted areas, but the “bathing areas” that covered beaches and lakes is gone.
I’ll spare the more technical issues for now, because even in it’s current form there’s a lot that still has to change and the legislature has a lot more hurdles to overcome. First, the companion bill in the House, HB 45, needs to mirror what the Senate is trying to do in order for this thing to become law. Aside from speaking before the Committees, our legislative team has been meeting individually with many Representatives and Senators and highlighting all the issues with these bills. Many are receptive and recognize that they will do more harm than good, creating a bunch of unintended consequences the State will not want to deal with if these bills pass.
The FAC Legislative Committee has done a tremendous job in chipping away at what would have been far worse legislation. Through advocacy, education, and engagement, the most extreme provisions were softened. But our work is far from done. We continue to fight to stop even this amended bill from passing. Any enhancement to the already draconian restrictions imposed on individuals whose offenses predate these laws raises serious constitutional concerns. Not to mention the dramatic increase to the already problematic homelessness numbers.
What we have been doing is working! We will remain vigilant, because protecting constitutional rights does not end when a bill is amended — it ends only when unconstitutional legislation is defeated.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thank you and kudos to you. Never give up!!
So, with the sponsors of this bill backing off, how can they defend their hardline position of child safety from their previous version? Apparently, they are not as concerned about PFR’s as they say they are when pounding their chests. Also, the newly amended version begs the question as the original bill did. How does the bill protect our children from PFR’s with its residency restrictions when PFR’s are still permitted to be present in the same locations that they cannot live within 1000 feet from? Finally, with the newly amended bill backing off its “bathing areas” definition, it is abundantly clear that this bill is solely about the Seminole County officer who is upset that a PFR lives in his community where there is nearby splash pad. While I am extremely grateful that the sponsors and legislators are backing off – thanks to FAC – I almost would respect their absurd position about their purported genuine concern for child safety more if they refused to amend the previously amended version.
I think the reason lawmakers backed off is that FAC members and volunteers helped educate them on the issue and understand it more clearly.
J – 100% correct. The bill sponsor even used the words if I remember correctly “narrowly tailor”. They are taking ever step to ensure there are no vague portions as courts do not like this. However!! They are still violating the US and Florida constitution by passing ex post facto laws even if they are intertwining it with statutes already on the books.
July is coming and hopefully the courts will take Ellingburg into consideration and find FLSORNA in violation of the Ex Post Facto and reset the stage.
It’s never been about protecting children. Ever.
ChatGPT is a good source for stats. I’ve been talking to this source of intelligence about Florida’s registry. I think everyone will find this quite interesting. I sent it to everyone in Tallahassee this morning. Y’all should all do the same. All of you.
These are facts from a non-emotional, unbiased, unlobbied, source of intelligence that is only able to give the facts. It exposes all the lies and myths about the “sex offender“ registry, specifically in Florida. All the legislators supporting these persecutions have some serious explaining to do as to why they are ignoring the facts, stomping all over the Constitution and the laws of God, by endlessly bullying their neighbors including families. 👇🏼
✅ 1. “The Florida sex offender registry does not protect anyone.”
There is no solid evidence showing that public sex-offender registries — in Florida or nationally — reduce sexual offenses or improve public safety.
Major research findings:
The Department of Justice has repeatedly found no statistically significant reduction in sexual reoffending after public registries were implemented.
Meta-analyses of multiple states show no deterrent effect from public notification systems.
Most sexual offenses are committed by first-time offenders, not by people on registries.
Registries may help law enforcement locate a person after an accusation, but this is very different from preventing crimes.
✅ 2. “Most have never done a physical act to anyone.”
This is largely true in Florida.
Florida registers:
Non-contact offenses (e.g., CP possession, solicitation, online sting operations).
Romeo and Juliet cases.
People who never met, touched, or communicated with a minor.
People whose cases involved only deleted digital fragments (like your son’s situation).
Because Florida has no tier system, the registry mixes:
Possession of illegal images
Voyeurism
Adult prostitution charges
Online stings
Hands-on child abuse
Violent sexual assault
all on one undifferentiated public list.
This is why Florida’s registry is considered one of the least accurate and least informative in the country.
✅ 3. “Florida ignores the established tier system.”
Correct.
The federal SORNA system uses risk-based tiers.
Florida rejected this and uses a lifetime blanket system, with “Predator” designations applied based on statutory criteria, not actual risk assessment.
This violates the spirit of SORNA and departs from the scientific consensus that risk varies dramatically among individuals.
✅ 4. “Florida violates the U.S. Constitution with unconstitutional restrictions.”
Many of Florida’s policies have been challenged, especially:
Residency restrictions
Presence restrictions
Driver license markings
Public notification
Lifetime registration without review
Retroactive application of new laws
Courts in other states have struck down similar laws as:
Ex post facto punishment
Overly broad
Violating substantive due process
Violating the 8th Amendment
Florida courts have been slower to adopt these positions, but challenges are increasing.
✅ 5. “95–97% of sex offenses are new offenses not done by people forced to register.”
This aligns with the established research.
Criminological data consistently shows:
More than 90% of sexual offenses are committed by people NOT on the registry.
First-time offenders — not people previously convicted — commit the overwhelming majority of sexual crimes.
People on registries have some of the lowest recidivism rates of any crime category (often 2–5%).
So yes — the registry is not targeting where harm actually comes from.
https://chatgpt.com/s/t_69971ea8ed988191983acf5e4bd398ae
Also from ChatGPT👇🏼
About 200,000 people on the registry committed crimes AS CHILDREN.
A recent report from the Juvenile Law Center estimates that approximately 200,000 individuals nationwide are on the sex offender registry for offenses they committed while they were minors. This includes people who were very young when the offense occurred (in some cases reported as YOUNG AS 8) and are still required to register decades later.
Great job, legislatures, on protecting all those children!🤦🏼♀️🤮
This may be one of those bills where the author(s) and sponsors were trying to make a name for themselves in an election year so they wouid compromise to get it to pass so they can use its passage in their reelection campaign. In fact I’m pretty sure thats exactly what it is. I’d be willing to bet that these politicians know in their hearts that this is useless legislation that will undoubtedly increase crime and homelessness but they simply do not care as long as it prolongs their political career.
Thank you for your hard work. I did not know how I was going to explain to my children why I couldnt take them to the beach or the park. Keep it up!!
FAC. Thank you so much for all of the hard work that you did. It is an amazing result considering where we were when this entire nonsense started and where you’ve been able to get us. And thanks to everyone who wrote and called.
The main question that I have now is the so called “grandfather” clause. If a PFR currently lives in a home or condo that meets all of the residency restriction requirements, but is within 1000 feet of a pool, will he or she have to move as of July 1, 2026. I fall under this category, so you can imagine the stress this is causing. Any info would be appreciated.
Thanks for the guidance.
You will not