ID: Another Court Says the Registry Isn’t Punishment.
A federal judge in Idaho has issued a decision in Does v. Labrador, a case challenging Idaho’s sex offender registry under the Ex Post Facto and Double Jeopardy Clauses of the Constitution. The decision is not the result the plaintiffs wanted. On September 29, Judge David Nye granted Idaho’s motion for summary judgment, holding that Idaho’s registry scheme is a civil regulatory system rather than criminal punishment.
The plaintiffs challenged four major components of Idaho’s system: lifetime registration, housing and employment restrictions, notification requirements, and the public registry. The court agreed that the challenges could be considered not only individually, but also by examining their cumulative effect.
The court candidly acknowledged that Idaho’s requirements are, collectively, “burdensome.” It simply concluded that burdensome is not the same thing as punishment under the constitutional test established by existing Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit precedent. Under Smith v. Doe, courts generally begin with the legislature’s stated intention. If lawmakers call a registry “civil,” courts then ask whether its actual purpose or effect is so punitive that the civil label cannot stand. The Idaho court emphasized that the challenger faces an extraordinarily high burden — requiring the “clearest proof” that the supposedly civil system is actually punishment.
The Idaho plaintiffs argued that when lifetime registration, housing and employment restrictions, constant reporting obligations, travel notification, and public dissemination of personal information are considered together, the result looks an awful lot like punishment. The court disagreed. It found that none of those restrictions, individually or collectively, were sufficiently punitive under current precedent.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Next they’ll claim it’s no different than standing in line at the DMV to have your picture taken..
I would like to see that judge undergoing the very same restriction we go through and see if he will call it “just burdensome” or “civil”.
Not exactly the news I wanted to read this morning. I hope those in Idaho keep challenging this.
The judges are more concerned with reappointment or reelection than whether laws are right ir wrong.
Federal judgeships are life appointments.
Not punishment? Try telling that to the falsely convicted who are actually innocent but victims of entrapment or lies from a supposed ‘victim’. Imagine another person suffering the effects of registration just from urinating outside. Great system we live under.
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn’t “Civil” carry only monetary penalties with no incarceration; while “Criminal” can carry both monetary payments and incarceration? So if a violation occurred under any of those items mentioned in the article and they are deemed “Civil” wouldn’t our fight be over wrongful sentencing as well?
Registration violations are unquestionably criminal.
It’s truly disheartening to see the blatant inconsistency in the justice system, where a minor registration error carries a higher bond than violent crimes like assault. My experience with the system has been incredibly eye-opening and frustrating, especially when they use your history to paint a completely distorted picture in front of a judge. It feels like there is zero room for nuance or fairness when you’re just looking for common sense. Assault with a knife also stabbing got $7500 bond I got a gps monitor and 15k bond. Failure to register a vehicle at sex offender office. That all