In Florida you provide all social media platforms when you register as offender/predator and its monitored so this makes no sense. That’s the entire reason for doing it this way is to keep an eye on what were doing online. Its illegal if you have social media accounts and they aren’t registered with the sheriff’s department or FDLE. Its just another part of how Fl does things

I am hopeful that you are right.

I also found the law (it’s Louisiana Revised Statute § 91.5. “Unlawful use of a social networking website”). This law is a clear and blatant violation of Packingham. In fact, the act that Mr. Packingham was originally arrested for in NC was a post on Facebook, and many of these folks in Louisiana were arrested for using Facebook. The fact that Louisiana “only” makes it a crime for registrants with minor victims to access social networking websites does not overcome the rationale expressed by SCOTUS in Packingham. In fact, the North Carolina law that SCOTUS struck down even required that the social networking website allow minors to access the website, which RS § 91.5 does not include as an element. I’m not aware of any federal circuit courts of appeal that have found such bans permissible under Packingham. If I’m wrong, someone please correct me.

In Florida, we have a different situation because there has already been a federal district court essentially ruling that registrants have a constitutional right to access social media and other internet accounts (the state had tried to require us to register all websites we visit–that was found unconstitutional) and that the most the state can do is require registering them under fairly narrow conditions.

Louisiana passed a social media ban and arrested people for violating it.

But Louisiana’s ban appears (slightly) more narrowly tailored than the one that was at issue in Packingham.

So it will be presumed constitutional until someone successfully challenges it.

The LA AG is betting these arrested folks won’t have the resources to challenge the arrests in court because no one will step and assist them en masse which is what needs to happen.

No state can pass a social media ban. North Carolina tried and got beat down by the United States Supreme Court, which ruled 9-0 in Packingham v. North Carolina (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-1194_08l1.pdf) that such bans are patently unconstitutional.

So, it’s not clear what the actual “crimes” were here. I read the original press release by the Louisiana Attorney General’s Office and the “crimes” were not specified. I am assuming they are a combination of probation violations (it is legal to prohibit internet or social media access as a condition of probation) and failure to register the social media accounts.

Florida hasn’t tried to pass a social media ban for registrants. The ban on general internet access as a condition of probation, yes and that’s been upheld, but not after.

https://www.newsweek.com/sex-offenders-arrested-louisiana-operation-restricted-domain-liz-murrill-11966427

Our children are in big trouble if this is our idea of protecting them. Talk about security theater!

If any legislator thinks about trying this in our state, then they and their colleagues are sure to hear from us.