Michigan Law Review: International Megan’s Law as Compelled Speech
When the IML was signed into law, a handful of observers saw it for what it was: bad policy. The sole representative to object to the passport identifier during congressional debate worried that the provision could lead to unintended consequences, including persecution and the risk of bodily harm.
Others denounced the IML’s provision as “vindictive and petty”and “premised on a profound and consequential misunderstanding of how sex crimes against minors are usually perpetrated.”This criticism of the passport identifier as policy is valid and important.But this Note argues further that the passport identifier is unconstitutional compelled speech. The government cannot validly claim that the passport identifier is owed the protection that courts normally afford to government speech. By conscripting passport-bearing Americans into warning others about their own prior convictions on the United States’ behalf, the government has run afoul-of the Constitution.The compelled speech doctrine protects passport holders who suffer this egregious violation to their speaker autonomy, particularly in light of the serious—even deadly—ramifications of the factual speech the passport identifier compels.
READ THE FULL LAW REVIEW ARTICLE
For purposes of re-election, lawmakers are measured by how many bills they introduce, how many pass and how they voted on the bills put forth. The more ambiguous legislation is, the bigger the “dance floor” meaning the law can intentionally go anywhere and confirm or deny any thing. Trampling the Constitution is not an issue because unless someone has the money and time to challenge the law, it stands as the law of the land without regard to its constitutionality.
Lawmakers swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the US. In this time of tearing down statues, maybe its time for a few of the “statues” that wrote this legislation to be targeted for removal from office next time the are up for re-election. How insane is it to re-elect people who swore an oath, wrap themselves in self-righteous robes then use their office to violate the oath. Organize and target for removal. First the low hanging fruit then move up the line maybe even eventually removing Lauren Book
None of this is about protection or the greater good, it is about punishment
Herein stands the elephant in the room. Before any law is enacted, there has to be a constitutional check. Without this safeguard, we will continue to have unconstitutional laws passed against us. The government has gotten away with this for so long, they are now using it on the general public because they know they can get away with it.
“Then they came for the Sex Offenders, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Sex Offender.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”
Question?
Does IML continue to EXIST on a Registrant , once the Registrant has been removed from the Registry of a Jurisdiction? As you know some Jurisdictions release Registrants after they have completed ‘their double jeopardy punishment’
There seems to be different answers surrounding this!
Anyone with additional info, please chime in!
Thank you
RTAG has insight into that question, I believe.
When you’re off the registry, I don’t think IML applies anymore. My “proof” of this is that I updated my passport and it was not stamped with whatever the offender stamp is. My first passport wasn’t stamped either but I got it before IML was signed.
You are not correct, Maestro. Many people STILL on the registry don’t have the brand.
See: https://floridaactioncommittee.org/a-deeper-dive-into-iml/ for more information
IML is Federal. So yes. Regardless of your status in the State you live in you will continue to be in the Federal listing unless you’re ever case has been dismissed through the courts.
What Federal listing? Now I am concerned.
There is no actual “National Registry” the National Registry just pulls information from the States.
I was under the impression that SORNA was at the State level and SORA was Federal…my mistake?
When you’re off the state registry, you’re also off the federal registry. I searched my name and it appears nowhere on any registry since I’ve been off of it. And my passport was not branded. I updated it a year after being off the registry. I also never got a notice that I had to get my previous passport stamped with the notice when I was on the registry. This is all very confusing, obviously.
Unless youre in florida. Im off my homestate but now on this for just being here. How fair is that????
It’s not fair. And people have to stop allowing it to happen. You did your required time. This is a free country not a dictatorship. This madness of making people re-register needs a lot of you guys to pull together in a lawsuit.
If Ron Book moved to another state that had different laws about DUI, will they take away his license after he’s already served his punishment in his home state? My guess is “no”. So they same should apply to anything else (which it does – except sex offenses). Is anyone challenging this insanity?
@Maestro, was your adjudication withheld (was your case even in Florida)? Mine, in Florida was withheld. I haven’t renewed my passport yet, but I’m curious whether it will get branded with the notification of sex offense, since I wasn’t “convicted”, since that specific wording is used in the IML text.
“This person was convicted of a sexual offense against minors” is, I think the approximate wording of the passport brand.
Obv they can’t well justify stating that regarding someone who has not in fact been convicted.
In any case, I’m not aware that renewing, in and of itself, has ever triggered the branding.
I can tell you this. I was not on probation, did not commit a crime in florida and my crime was in the state of Wisconsin. when I traveled to the philippines I was NOT ALLOWED IN to marry a lady I had known for over 10 years. Before I left the US I had to fill out a HLS document telling them where I was going where I would be staying and for how long. I contacted the judicial department 5 times to ensure I was NOT on their black list. When I arrived they detained me, put me on their black list threatened me if I would return I would be incarcerated, put on a plane the next day to return to the US. The US notifies the Judicial department of your arrival date time and flight number. My travel with a legal passport was in 2016. I went there to marry the woman.
So are they going to try and do something about it or is it just another article to pacify us?
I don’t think they’re looking to pacify anyone. They want to be cited.
Most curious. The compelled speech may also apply to those who have their Drivers License branded? Just a thought.
100% That case is a GREAT case. it’s just not been brought.
That case HAS been brought within our Federal circuit, no?
https://floridaactioncommittee.org/reason-sex-offenders-are-not-second-class-citizens-says-judge-while-nixing-alabama-rules-on-first-amendment-grounds/
Correct – this is in the 11th Circuit, which is why I suggested that the driver’s license brand would be an EXCELLENT case to bring.
The case cited FL’s license scheme as one that COULD pass constitutional muster, because it only called out a subclass (“sexual predator”) and for all others was less explicit than AL (branded with a code only).
While FL license branding deserves challenge, our lawyers will need to be cautious about cases such as this one!
This is good I guess. We just need the law tested.
The biggest issue I saw with the document is so much that they argued to remove the sex offender label from the written passport as much as they recommended to “move it” as they recommended embedding the information in the RFID tag in the passport. I don’t see this really as being very helpful because IML will still enforce the no-travel policy once the passport is scanned. IML just needs to be scrapped IMHO, otherwise we effectively will be trapped in this country.
The only way that the passport identifier could even approach being Constitutional is if it applies to all offenders and not just sex offenders.