Special IDs for Sex Offenders: Safety Measures or Scarlet Letters?
The Supreme Court will soon consider whether to hear a First Amendment challenge to a Louisiana law that required driver’s licenses to identify sex offenders.
According to a Louisiana law, people convicted of sex crimes must use driver’s licenses with the words ‘sex offender’ in large orange letters below their photos.
It can make everyday encounters – with bank tellers, hotel attendants, supermarket cashiers, election officials, airport security officers and prospective employers – humiliating. Critics call the notation a contemporary blood-red letter. State officials said it protects the public from predators.
The Supreme Court of Louisiana hit the law last year and said it violated the First Amendment. State officials have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case, one that raises important questions about public policy and doctrines about the First Amendment.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
1st amendment?
What about 5th amendment compelled speech? Haven’t we won on that?
Maybe I’m remembering this wrong.
It amazes me to no end how willing the governments are willing to sh!t all over the Constitution and abandon core principles that built this nation under the pretense of public safety.
Bill, let me just say that when I went to trial for CP and my defense brought up several issues of due process and improper computer search that violated written public policies, the federal judge literally shrugged his shoulders and said “so what, counsel?” They don’t recognize the constitution as we do. That’s why there are so many exceptions to the exclusionary rule. Just take a look at all the exceptions that courts created, not legislation or even our founding fathers.
Public safety and security are the most common words of despots.
I myself have first hand experience using my id with my status on it. I was cashing a check the teller looked at my id and told me the funds were not available that there would be a 48 hour hold when I questioned this as I had never had this happen with any of the numerous checks I had cashed from this company before and asked to see a manager the teller called over to another teller who came over she showed her my id not the computer screen which is where it would show this hold the second girl backed up the first my wife called customer service they said they would figure it out then told us to go back to the drive thru where the actual manager was waiting for us she apologized and told us she was in a meeting and that the second teller was supposed to be acting in her behalf and she would not tolerate this kind of discrimination and gave me her cell number telling me to call her if I ever had a problem like this ever again and that both of the tellers would be reprimanded . I have not had a problem there ever since luckily the manager had a loved one on the registry and knows the problems we face and has compassion for our people. (yep they have made us a new race )
Tim
You cannot complain about this because the courts said it is not punishment. Well if it is not punishment it must be the opposite of that then. It must be the Governments “Reward” for being a registered citizen. (Of course I am being sarcastic)
Your WIFE was even punished for God’s sake. I am so sorry you have to go through that. The only similar thing I had happen was at the driver’s license place. The clerk took one look at my license and yelled loud enough for the 200 people in the waiting room to hear “Sir did you know your license says you are a SEX OFFENDER”? I literally peed my pants.
And, my license does not say that, it has a statue # but on her screen I guess that is what comes up. Thanks for letting me know, now I can go register.
Justice is so lopsided. If the U.S. Supreme Court rules against sex offenders then it’s only fair that murderers drivers license say “murderer” on it and the same way should be for drugs, abductors, thieves, kidnapper, arsonist, gang member, abuser, etc…
Dustin
All people who have a history of abusing animals should be put on an abuse registry and have Animal Abuser in big read letters on their drivers license. Now that wouldn’t cause any outcray would it?
Teachers who discipline students should have child abuser on their drivers licenses. Bad cops will have licenses that said “Donut thief”, When you get ripped off at the car dealer for repairs, the mechanics license will have to read “Scammer”.
When the fast food employee messes up your order they have to have their licenses branded with “poisoned customers”.
The list could go on and on until everyone is on some sort of registry and have brandings on their licenses. Of course their has to be address checks.
I have said this before and will say it again, just like the signs some offenders have to / did have to place in their front yards, this is 100000% punishment. A branding for life for something that may have happened decades ago is a death sentence by vigilantes waiting to happen.
Each new obligation the officials get away with emboldens them to push the limits to what they can do to us. When will it stop?
Sadly I know a registered person
who had to go into a hospital for some issues
the hospital but see Nurse at desk b4 entering
they told everybody he was RSO and he treatment was total nightmare!!
including blood draws they would just jam that fking needle in his arm ask him if it hurt. and smiled ear to ear then he would use the call button and no one came to check on him
FTR
This happened to me after recovering from Kidney stone surgery. I had a tube in my urethra Franklin. It had to be replaced and the head nurse closed the door and said “I am going to fix you good” and started yanking on the tube.
I cannot repeat on here what I said to her but it was a threat I intended to keep if she did not leave. I pulled the emergency cord and told them what happened. NOTHING was done to her. I ended up having a 2nd surgery because of it. I contacted a lawyer and they would not even touch the case.
If true, that could constitute medical malpractice and entitle him to damages.
Link to the actual case..
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20-1587.html