Huge WIN in Illinois. A defendant challenged the State’s complete ban on accessing ‘social networking websites’ as a condition of probation as unreasonable and unconstitutional under the First Amendment. The Supreme court agreed.
This broadens the effect of Packingham (which was the SCOTUS case that found complete bans on accessing social media were unconstitutional except for as a condition of probation) for people on probation in Illinois. However, while Packingham was binding on all states, this case is only binding on IL. That said; it’s a supreme court of IL case and it makes for useful persuasive precedent.
You can read the OPINION here.
PA: legislator proposes blanket internet ban –
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/billinfo/billinfo.cfm?syear=2019&sind=0&body=H&type=B&bn=2653
(h/t: Joshua Vaughn of The Appeal, and Guy Hamilton-Smith)
This IS a huge win for Illinois, but it does nothing to help those of us who must pay the extortive abuse of the pay computer monitoring people who are charging 32 bucks a month for any internet capable device one has, and is a resource robber of the first order. A state of the art machine with the necessary monitoring equipment on it runs like a horse and buggy on an internet built for a Lamborghini. You want a smartphone? Cough up ANOTHER 32 bucks a month for that ON TOP of your phone company’s charges.
Look into a program called Covenant Eyes. Covers everything, all devices/ for about $120 a year.
I am in TN and had to use Covenant Eyes for a while, but the state dropped the requirement and allows unmonitored access, provided the offense does not involve the use of social media to meet/groom victims or distribution of child pornography. Covenant Eyes is 13 bucks and some change per month and all devices are covered. I had a PC, a tablet, and a phone all covered for the same low price.
Woohoo about time judges recognize.