MO: Families of Registrants Get Rebuffed by 8th Circuit
Spouses and children of registrants in Missouri argued their homes’ inclusion on the registry left them socially ostracized in violation of the 8th Amendment.
The plaintiffs argued that public access to the registry does not lower recidivism rates, that the psychological and social impacts the public registry inflicts upon innocent family members (spouses and children) was cruel, and that when the Supreme Court originally evaluated registries decades ago, search engine technology and internet accessibility did not exist as it does today.
In a disappointing decision, today an Eighth Circuit panel found Missouri’s public sex offender registry does not create “a permanent, inescapable badge of stigma”. In affirming a lower court’s ruling, the three-judge panel refused to revive claims that the registry — also known as SORA — is broadly punitive and violates their constitutional rights. “In their brief to this court, the Does do not cite a case supporting their theory that family members who are incidentally affected by Mo. SORA have a plausible constitutional claim,” Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Ralph R. Erickson, a Donald Trump appointee, wrote in the unanimous opinion.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
My wife moved to Florida and bought property before I moved here. After I registered in Florida my wife had several negative interactions at her current employer (which was a university) . She has since quit. She has a master’s degree in data technology, yet nobody wants to even give her interview. Are they looking up the address before the interview? So yes the registry goes beyond the PFR.
It’s said that many children who are victims of sexual abuse carry trauma with them for a long time afterward. I wonder if it’s also true that children living in a PFR’s residence, who are bullied and ostracized by their classmates, carry trauma as well. Of course it’s very true. They are just a different kind of victim, unrecognized by many of the people who consider themselves to be child advocates.