Florida Supreme Court to Review “Sexual Predator” Driver’s License Labeling
A case with major implications for the constitutional rights of those on the registry is now headed to the Florida Supreme Court.
Attorneys for Michael Crist have filed a notice seeking review of an appellate decision that upheld Florida’s requirement that people classified as “sexual predators” have that exact phrase printed in bold letters on their driver’s licenses. Crist, who was accused in 2019 of trying to cover the label with a sticker, argued that the mandate violates the First Amendment by forcing individuals to carry and display the state’s message on personal identification.
While the 5th District Court of Appeal rejected that argument, Judge Scott Makar issued a powerful dissent, pointing out that compelled government speech must be narrowly tailored. Other states, including Louisiana and Alabama, have already ruled that such branding is unconstitutional. Makar noted that Florida could easily use a less intrusive method, such as a statute number or internal code (as it already does for individuals labeled “sex offenders”) rather than plastering stigmatizing words across an ID.
The majority opinion tried to downplay the harm by claiming a license is “normally hidden from public view.” But as we all know, driver’s licenses are constantly required to be shown — at airports, banks, workplaces, when buying alcohol or cigarettes, when purchasing with a credit card, and more. Forcing people to repeatedly display a scarlet-letter label turns every interaction into an act of public shaming.
Supporters of the law, including former State Senator Lauren Book, have framed the designation as a “community safety tool.” But branding IDs is not about safety. Have people historically shown IDs before they committed a sexual offense? It is about punishment and perpetual humiliation — a burden that extends far beyond a prison sentence and undermines the basic constitutional protections that are supposed to apply to all citizens.
The Florida Supreme Court now has an opportunity to consider whether compelled government speech in the form of scarlet-letter driver’s licenses crosses the line into unconstitutional territory.
We will continue to monitor developments closely. If the Court agrees to hear the case, it could open the door to meaningful change.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
We are designated this by statue! (Which is wrong in itself,much less plaster it on a personal ID) Not because our being has predatory inclinations.
Now, you think the general public would even contemplate that.
I have had my own experiences in Dr’s offices, banks. Society doesn’t want you to move on, you could be innocent, truly remorseful, your actions align with being productive 30/15 years later and it doesn’t matter.
Its truly a modern day exploitation, weaponization scheme for funds,profit ,votes, revenge.
was this not already seen as unconstitutional in other states? if so we have a precedent do we not? i don’t have to do it but i can just imagine the humiliation for those that do
My question is, what about people like me who have Disabled Vet licence plates. Are they going to take those away from honorably discharged vets with disabilities?
There’s no bill on the table. Why are you worried about hypotheticals?
The legislature was contemplating changing colors of license plates, as well as changing our licenses. Would they also take the veteran tag off my Drivers License to make room for a Scarlet Letter?
Legislation proposing color-coded plates and licenses was withdrawn in 2023 following FAC member opposition.
Ahh thank you, let’s just hope they never bring it up again
I have repeatedly said, I am willing to testify as to shame and issues I have had with this on my DL. Going to buy gigs at DG, getting a “Sams Card”, cashing a check and so forth. I have had my wife, and kids with me when the person asked for ID, and they get “looks” from them and they get traumatized, and they are innocents. So, it goes beyond the person with the ID label! I went to buy a car, motorcycle and the dealer seen that, suddenly I was treated differently. And one time, at a store the cashier told me ” Sir, you can’t shop here, this is a family store, and we don’t want your patronage”. And wouldn’t let me pay for my purchases! (Family Dollar)
I was with my daughter who was 23 at that time and she was embarrassed, and mad. She told the cashier a few choice words, and was told by the cashier, ” well, if your dad would “play” with little kids, he wouldn’t have these problems”! So, it does way freakin beyond what they say!
After being on this for a crime I pled to (because of a uneducated lawyer) in 1997, and never even had a ticket been a model citizen, since then. I would have murdered someone I would have less issues!
So, as I said, I can put another “real face” to this if it helps and tell my issues with it.
But NO ONE has taken me up on it, so, I wonder, why not?
I understand Arnold. But the issue is being litigated in State court with the Crist case and in Federal court with the Kirkpatrick case. Just be patient and have faith. A favorable outcome in either or both of these cases will resolve the license issue.
This ruling will be big because if the Florida Supreme Court agrees with the 5th DCA, then you know the legislators will pass a law that sex offenders must have the words “SEXUAL OFFENDER” in red letters placed on the front of their licenses as well.
If this were to happen, I would be out of this state within 24 hours.
Aaaaaand…since Ms. Book is behind this “safety tool” effort, I nominate the number of DUIs be placed on a different color DL/ID for all of those who are convicted of DUI regardless of the location received in. This will or could give pause to those locations who serve alcohol to those have this and save them from third party liability of being sued if the drunk driver kills or maims someone else or damages property. That may hit a bit close to home for her, but oh well.
Oh wait, alcoholism can be seen as a disability and therefore is a medical derived status too and cannot be put onto DL/IDs…
Seriously, people with DUIs driving a vehicle would alarm me a lot more than anyone with an “SVP” sticker, yet the government chooses the most stupid things to do.