FDLE Sidesteps Critical Questions on “Internet Identifiers” and “Mobile Homes”, Leaving Registrants in the Dark
In December, the Florida Action Committee submitted a Request for Declaratory Statement to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement seeking clarity on the state’s “Internet Identifier” reporting requirements. The request was prompted by a troubling pattern: members being arrested for allegedly failing to report accounts that either do not fall under the statute or, in some cases, accounts they were not even aware existed. FAC submitted a second Request for “Mobile Homes”.
Under Florida Statutes Section 120.565, any substantially affected person has the right to ask an agency how a law applies in specific circumstances. The purpose of that statute is simple – clarity. When the government imposes criminal penalties, the people subject to those laws are entitled to understand what is required of them. FDLE has now responded. And instead of providing that clarity, they effectively declined to answer the question.
The response avoids addressing the core issue: what exactly qualifies as a reportable “Internet Identifier” under Florida law, particularly in light of the federal court ruling in the Internet Identifier case before Robert Hinkle? That was the very ambiguity that led to the arrests in the first place, and it remains unresolved.
This is more than frustrating; it’s a fundamental problem. If the agency tasked with enforcing a law cannot, or will not, clearly explain what that law requires, then how are individuals supposed to comply? And just as importantly, how are law enforcement officers across different counties supposed to enforce it consistently?
We are already seeing a patchwork of interpretations from county to county. What is considered a reportable identifier in one jurisdiction may not be treated the same way in another. That kind of subjectivity is exactly what the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is meant to guard against. Laws that carry criminal penalties must be clear enough for an ordinary person to understand what conduct is prohibited. When they are not, they are vulnerable to being struck down as unconstitutionally vague. FDLE’s refusal to provide a direct answer only underscores the problem. It leaves registrants guessing, law enforcement improvising, and prosecutors deciding after the fact what the law supposedly meant all along. That is not how the rule of law is supposed to work.
If clarity cannot be obtained from the agency charged with enforcing the statute, then the issue will inevitably have to be resolved in the Courts. Because a law that cannot be clearly explained is a law that cannot be fairly enforced.
Here are FAC’s Requests:
Req for FDLE Declaratory Opinion RE Internet Identifiers_Redacted
Req for FDLE Declaratory Opinion RE Manufactured Home_Redacted
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Sounds like a typical registry move by the FDLE. I have had enough experiences where the powers that be couldn’t give a straight answer. It’s systemic. From the woman who ran the registration process in Volusia County. The probation office and the sheriff’s office itself. It’s incredibly frustrating.
These MFs MUST be challenged! They are entirely too cavalier!
When one of these acts of negligence and sloth is challenged and loses their qualified immunity and are sued personally where it has to come out of their own pockets then this is what has to happen. I have made phone calls on other matters to have the DA define their position on a statute and then told to ask an attorney, this is infuriating. To have the legal expertise to create the legal challenge how cool would that be. I’m sure there are grounds of neglect where taxpayers are not forced to pay for the incompetence or willful disdain to provide what they are legally required to do, it will only be cash out of their pockets that changes things. I don’t know if their union would pay for intentional negligence in a settlement. I see no other course unless it comes down to a thing said by Thomas Jefferson I hesitate to say.
I bought a manufactured home and a piece of land in 2021. A few years after that I had a deputy come to the house to do a “compliance check” and she questioned me about it. I showed her the paperwork and proved to her that it’s considered “real property.” I showed her underneath the house to prove the tongue was removed and the mounts used to secure the house. She left me alone after that lol
FDLE doesn’t have a clear idea because that’s how FL legislators write laws. Ambiguous at best. Makes things easier to pass because the lazy and corrupt don’t bother to read and clarify. Any law, ordinance, any recommendation to anyone should be Clear/Detailed and reasonably enforceable. If it does not meet both of those criteria – then it is not a law or ordinance. Shouldn’t be that hard. Try passing some of these vague “laws” in the business world and see where that gets you.
The way I interpret this mess is that you need to register any website or app that provides an opportunity for direct and private social chat capability. Even if you never use it. Public forum chat rooms or business-related communications would be exempt. Thats how I view it anyway
I really do not have words. I can say that comments on News sites etc I believe has already been settled but …………….. Their response was a copy and paste. with minor changes. Perhaps this needs to go back to Judge Hinkle for clarification, if even possible. Laws like Sorna are intentionally left vague just like the response you got. Ebay is a perfect example. Judge Hinkle basically saying only ” Social Media” Ebay while does have direct communication between, “Buyer and Seller” falls, in my opinion outside the “social media” circle and into the, “commercial” side; Ie Banks, Stores, Car insurance etc. That being said I was told that I had to list my eBay account under the identifiers and I created a ‘Store’ and sold things under employment as well. I dont sell on eBay but my account is reported. Better to be safe than sorry IMHO. I cant speak to Youtube or the google thing I have neither and no social media, period. It is just not my thing.