FAC requests declaratory statement from FDLE on “Internet Identifiers”
The Florida Action Committee has submitted a Request for Declaratory Statement from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement concerning the recent arrest of several members who have allegedly failed to report “Internet Identifiers” for accounts that probably don’t have to be reported under the Statute and Judge Hinkle’s Order in the Internet Identifier case, or for accounts they don’t even know they have.
Section 120.565 of the Administrative Procedures Act authorizes any substantially affected person to request an agency’s opinion on how a statute, rule, or order applies in particular circumstances.
If the interpretation of the Statute is so subjective and varies depending on which County you register, the entire statute is vulnerable to a constitutional vagueness challenge under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and under Florida’s Constitution as well.
A copy of the request can be viewed here: Req for FDLE Declaratory Opinion RE Internet Identifiers_Redacted
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
If the “legislation” would pass laws that were not subject to interpretation then a lot of problems would be mitigated. However, since it’s possible in Floriduh to pass a “law” that is barely enforceable and vaguely written – all kinds of wannabe dictator/sheriffs can do whatever they want. Expecting no one will file a lawsuit because the “courts” in Floriduh are run by the Florida Socialist Workers Party then there is little chance of winning. I sort of rambled – my bad
Rick
The true problem with that is this. You get arrested. Then the judge states you were not at fault. But the registry rules have often had people’s charges dropped but the registry rules state “Any arrests” even dropped charges can cause one to never be removed from the registry.
Having said that, I saw one poster say they got removed even with a violation, another got their dropped but were still denied removal because of the charges regardless of them being dropped. That leads me to believe that judges do not even agree amongst themselves.
There was a lawsuit filed in this case, and we won in 2018. The definition of “internet identifier” was strictly limited by statute and a federal court order. If the police are arresting registrants for not reporting internet accounts that don’t meet the legal and judicially-ordered definition of “internet identifier,” then the police are violating the court order as well as the law, and should be held accountable.
There are so many rules and regulations to keep up with, it’s almost impossible not to trip on something….
They are going to nitpick so much on different issues to the point all of us are going to end up getting arrested. I did not have these many rules and requirements even when I was on probation.
Many of us have gone decades without a misstep but it is becoming almost impossible to abide by and interpret all these laws, ordinances, rules, statues and what every else they throw at us. It seems each session they come up with new ways to make it harder to even leave the house without fear of ending up in handcuffs.
Many of us are trying to aim for getting off the registry, but one small mistake and you are down for the count. None of us want to die on the registry but it is happening more and more as the years go by sadly.
From my understanding, any site, app, software, chat boards, and games that allow you to comment, or communicate with others. Needs to be registered. Exceptions are news and government sites, and anything pertaining to the trade, purchasing, and sales of goods or commodities, as the primary purpose of such applications. An example like EBay, offer up, and Amazon, are not required to be registered.
Tareto, that might be your understanding, but unfortunately your understanding has no legal effect. I wish it did. FDLE’s understanding might.
The following is a quote from the Delgado case (the Internet Identifier challenge):
“The FDLE Commissioner, represented in this litigation by the Attorney General of Florida, has agreed—indeed, has affirmatively asserted—that the requirement to register an internet identifier is triggered only by direct user-to-user communications. See Def.’s Mot. Summ. J., ECF No. 77, at 12 (“The context of the registration provisions makes clear that they relate solely to actual online communications by a registered sexual offender with another person.”); Rough Tr. of Summ. J. Hr’g at 48 (agreeing, after specific questioning, that the requirement to register an internet identifier “only applies when there is a communication with another user”). The state’s solemn representation that the statute is so limited confirms that this reading of the statute is correct.”
So another understanding is that registration is limited to “direct user-to-user communications”, such as direct messaging (DM). YouTube allows users to comment on videos but you can’t have any direct user-to-user communication, only publicly comment. Yet people are being arrested for YouTube. People have been arrested for “Google Drive” as well, though it’s tough to imagine how one would facilitate direct user-to-user communication (or communicate at all) through a cloud-based storage application.
FAC-3. YouTube is on the FDLE list of what you have to report. On the list there is a drop-down menu. Wouldn’t something Like YouTube that has live streams with people being able to chat during the video count? I have zero social media. No Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, the snap thingy, X, etc. Everything that I have reported, none of it is on their drop-down list. Mine are all under “Other” on that drop down.
Yes. The only reason Judge Hinkle found the actual requirement to report internet identifiers constitutional at all was the “solemn declaration” of the then-FDLE Commissioner that the requirement would be narrowly construed as in the order.
To the extent that any police officer in the state arrests a registrant for not reporting an internet account that is not, in fact, an “internet identifier” under the law (and that federal court order), the police officer has in effect arrested the person for a non-existent crime, which is one of the few instances in which police officers do not enjoy immunity from personal civil liability. Google Drive is clearly not a “commercial social networking website” under the law–not even close. To me, arresting a registrant for not register a Google Drive account is no different than arresting him for not reporting the color of his shirt that day. Such an arrest is a knowing, if not intentional, violation of the individual’s civil rights. I hope those wrongfully arrested find a good lawyer and sue the police officers personally.
Hi T.
So, I agree with you about EBAY and Amazon. However, I was told I had to register EBAY and that if started selling on EBAY I would have to list it under employment as well. My understanding is that if you can have direct communication with another person you have to report that unless its what you mentioned. Banks, Car Insurance, Stock accounts etc you do not. I agree with you about Ebay but i list it because they told me too. It is my understanding that FAC for example does not. Do we know what sites the PFR were popped for?
I can’t tell you how important this actually is. They’ve been intentionally leaving it vague, allowing for individual official interpretation, making it more likely to generate compliance failures.
This is a fantastic idea, great letter and much needed. Thank you FAC!
Indeed! Thank You!