Weekly Update #54
Dear Members and Advocates:
Is it time to sue Facebook? The social media giant has a policy of banning persons required to register as sex offenders from their platform. Their Terms of Service expressly prohibit registrants from being on the platform and they even have a policy for removing profiles from persons required to register.
Part of me thinks the platform is a useless waste of time and I feel no need to share what I ate for breakfast with others. But another part of me deeply resents the fact that family and friends, including relatives from far away, are sharing a meaningful connection that I can’t be a part of. They get updates on each other’s lives and congratulate each other on birthdays, holidays and milestones in a shared online community. It eats at me when I can’t join an online group or comment on a news article because it requires a Facebook login to participate. In the modern world, the exclusion has inhibited our ability to connect, assimilate into our communities and grow our businesses, all of which are the stated objectives of Facebook.
In 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the government cannot ban registrant’s access to social media (the Packingham case) because such a ban is not narrowly tailored; it does not leave open ample alternative channels for the First Amendment activities it burdens; and it does not directly or effectively further the government’s interests. However, just because the government can’t block you, doesn’t mean that the social media company can’t block you. And they do… some, such as Nextdoor, even ban everyone that lives in your household!
So why hasn’t our advocacy community sued Facebook already? It’s a matter of resources. Facebook is a $350 billion dollar company (that’s Billion with a “B”). They have teams of lawyers on standby to drag such a case to the Supreme Court and back without putting a dent in their pocketbooks. We don’t have those kinds of resources. If you look at the meters on our donations page it speaks for itself. That’s not just intended to be a subtle plea for help funding our challenges, but the only answer to the questions, “why can’t we do something” or “what can I do to help”.
So then why am I asking if now’s time to do something? A couple months ago, Eric George, managing partner of a law firm that represents PragerU in a lawsuit against YouTube, posted a video explaining the background behind their lawsuit. (You can watch the video here: https://youtu.be/d6C6_NVj964.) In the video he explains the distinction between being a “publisher” and a “public forum”. Clearly a government-owned public park can be considered a public forum, but more recently – whether through this case, Knight First Amendment Inst. at Columbia Univ. v. Trump (individuals sued to prevent the President from blocking them on Twitter) or Packingham, Courts are recognizing private social media portals to be the modern day public square, and blocking people from a public forum can potentially impact First Amendment rights. These rights are particularly important when it comes to communicating with government, familial association and parenting (such as the ability to monitor what your children do online) – all of which someone on the registry cannot do through these online forums.
It’s unlikely FAC would ever be able to come up with the financial resources to take on social media companies such as Facebook or Nextdoor alone, but hopefully we can find a few civil or constitutional rights organization that are taking on these challenges and align ourselves with them. This fight is not about protecting the rights of individuals the public disfavors. This fight is about protecting the First Amendment rights for all individuals. We just need a partner in this fight and we invite the input and participation of other advocacy groups. Let’s make this happen!
And to end our weekly update on a good note, the FDLE’s Motion to Stay the Ex Post Facto Plus case was denied today! A copy of the 2 page order will be posted to our site.
Sincerely,
The Florida Action Committee
Amazon Smile – select (FAC Outreach Partner “Justice Transitions in Sanford FL” as your charity. Make purchases using https://smile.amazon.com in order to be certain that Justice Transitions (and FAC members) benefit from your purchases.
SOME HEADLINES FROM THIS WEEK
READ THIS: DON’T BE SCAMMED
Scams targeting people on the registry are becoming more and more prevalent. Because of the wealth of personal information publicly available through the online registry and the abundance of confusing requirements, persons on the registry are easy targets for scams….
The Dobbs Wire: Organizing inside!
The Dobbs Wire: Organizing inside. There’s good news out of Marcy where several hundred men have been locked up indefinitely in New York’s sex offense civil commitment facility. Those inside are working collectively to build some influence and, no doubt, draw…
4th DCA overturns conviction for failure to register
In a decision handed down by Florida’s 4th District Court of Appeal, the Fourteen (14) YEAR sentence of a person required to register for a Failure to Register charge was overturned after the state could not prove he failed to register within 48 hours of “establishing…
NC: NCRSOL speaking out against state fair ban
Person’s on the North Carolina registry are speaking out against a law that bans registrants from attending the North Carolina State Fair. NARSOL and NCRSOL’s Robin Vanderwall spoke out against the ban. His organization is also involved in a legal challenge to the NC…
What effect do people think it would have if no government agency were allowed to use Facecrook? So no county government could have a Facecrook page. No law enforcement. None of them. And the reason would be because Facecrook keeps part of the public from using their services. What effect does everyone think that would have?
Because to me, it seems to be an easy case to argue that government agencies should not be allowed to use Facecrook. Why should they be allowed to post public information in a location where some part of the public is ACTIVELY and PURPOSELY prevented from seeing it? Or especially if they allow the public to talk about it there. How could that be allowed or legal?
So perhaps the answer is to sue a local government agency? Perhaps in federal court? Then once they lose, keep suing in various places to carry it across the entire country (or maybe a couple of federal districts disagree and SCOTUS settles it). I don’t think Facecrook or nextdoor.com would be happy if governments couldn’t use them. In fact, nextdoor.com uses governments as their EXCUSE as to why Registrants cannot be allowed onto their platform!! They say it is because of their partnerships with law enforcement! The nextdoor.com ban is completely outrageous. Goes against all of their lies about how it is for “community”, etc. Nothing but lies.
And lastly, there really are no legitimate, moral reasons that Facecrook or nextdoor.com would block any member of the free public from using their services. It takes a real idiot to believe their lies that it has anything to do with protecting anyone. Only idiot law enforcement criminals believe that nonsense. And the idiot boot lickers that worship them.
I don’t know about anyone else on here but I could give less than two sheites about being on fb or any other social media platform. There is always e-mail and facetime on your phone. I don’t know anyone that doesnt’t at least have an andriod phone.
It is my opinion that any monies spent by FAC on any suits, should be spent on suits leading to a better way of life for offenders. I would be more than happy to donate generously if I knew you were going to file a suit against the State of Florida to fight the corrupt, unfair and dishonest Registry. These ar the things that REALLY matter in our lives. Not the fact that someone can’t communicate through fb. I would wager that almost every other person on here that has to register would agree with me as well.
Edward – we did. Look at Does 1-5 v. Swearingen (the “Ex Post Facto Plus” lawsuit). It was filed in the Southern District of Florida (case no. 18-24145) and is pending.
We look forward to your generous donation! https://floridaactioncommittee.org/donations/
That is a person specific case and does not apply to having the unfair registry laws declared unconstitutional. Correct me if I am wrong? Does this apply ONLY to the John Does in the specific suit?
I see you have chosen NOT to answer my follow up question:
Ed D. on November 13, 2019 at 7:56 pm
That is a person specific case and does not apply to having the unfair registry laws declared unconstitutional. Correct me if I am wrong? Does this apply ONLY to the John Does in the specific suit?
Please answer this question. Is it a Class action suit against the Registration Laws themselves? Or a “Person specific” case that will only affect those named in the suit?
A facial challenge to a law does not need to be a class action in order to benefit people other than the does.
Our challenge is a facial challenge. it will benefit all impacted by the laws.
You did not answer my question. Will it benefit all on the registry? Or just those with the same circumstances as those named in the suit?
Why doesn’t someone (FAC) file a suit to challenge the actual Constitutionality of the Registry itself? I wouldn’t think it would cost any more than what is being paid to defend the Does? Why?
It will benefit all on the registry who committed an offense before a new restriction was passed.
It will even benefit all those who committed an offense AFTER the restriction passed. That’s the “plus” part of “ex post facto plus.”
Actually, you are correct! I was in haste to get this commenter an answer.
I think that I have asked this before, Jacob, but I am still have trouble understanding. How will it help someone whose offense was in 2016?
SarahF, it will benefit someone > 2016 because it challenges the law not just on ex post facto grounds but multiple other grounds, such as lack of procedural due process, lack of substantive due process, and cruel and unusual punishment.
For some reason it would not let me reply directly to your message.
I’ve been Registered/harassed for over 2 decades and I don’t care about being on Facecrook either other than being able to use it to comment against these illegal Registration “laws” and harassment.
However, I disagree with you completely that it is not important to fight those cases. In fact, I think every single “smaller” case like that should be fought. Everything that these criminal regimes do regarding Registries should be challenged, all the time and always. Everything. Even the smallest transgression should not be allowed.
There are many reasons for that but I think one of the most important is that these criminal regimes need to stop thinking that the Registries are their toy that they can use to dream up any idiotic harassment that they like and then just apply to all of the listed people with no consequences. They need to be controlled and kept from abusing their toy. Because much of what they do with their toy is just so insanely anti-American that literally no decent, moral American could ever think it was acceptable. So how can good people just stand by and not worry about it?
I also think that the Broken Windows Theory applies completely to the Registries. The more harassment that these criminal regimes are allowed, the more they try to take.
I have seen a lot of law enforcement agencies over the years and I have yet to see a single one, not a single one, that operates within the law. They ALWAYS try to operate outside of law. Always. If you tell them they can do A and B, they will try to do A and B and X, Y, and Z. People should not allow that but they almost always do.
Remember the main lie that got the Registries created? That they were just needed only so that people could be “informed”. All experts said that Registries were a dumb idea, that it was a slippery slope, and that they would be counterproductive. Wow, have they ever been proven to have been right?!! The Registries were just the foundation needed to grow nanny big government bigger and grow a gigantic, illegal, out-of-control, anti-American harassment scheme.
Thank You FAC for being willing to at least try and take on this monster. I know it won’t be easy. I’ve never been one to shy away from a fight. But even the under dog can bite the heals of his opponent and make him squirm. We are not the only ones that are upset with them. Even the federal government is at odds with them and we could get some help from unlikely places. Wish you Gods speed.
F*ck Facebook! All that drama,arguing and other people putting in their 2 cents worth opinions All this media outlet has cause chaos and hardships for other people. I would not even “cast the pearls before the swine.” plus boycott that as anything else that supports the blacklist
I am totally lost as to what you are trying to say.
LOL, much of that was stated in a funky way. That’s beefstew327. 🙂
He is saying f*ck Facecrook, which I agree with completely. He is saying that Facecrook has mostly just caused trouble in society and that everyone should boycott them and anyone/anything else that supports Registries. I also agree with that and think that people should be paying a LOT more attention to that. Do NOT do business with anyone or anything that supports Registries. We should have an online, national blacklist of anti-American companies and people. But anyway ….
Facecrook is being attacked in many ways. I’m helping as many as I can find. Some of them I don’t even care about or maybe even disagree with (e.g. the political ad attacks), but I’m still going to help people attack them. Just because Facecrook supports Registries. Only reason.
Having said all of that, I do think Registered People should fight to be allowed to use Facecrook. I posted another comment just above about that so I won’t go into more details here.
I’m actually quite surprised that no one has yet been successful at preventing law enforcement agencies from using Facecrook. It should be apparent to any American that it should not be allowed. In fact, no government agency should be allowed to use Facecrook. It is immoral, it should be illegal.
How can any government agency put content onto Facecrook and allow the public to talk about it – except not all of the public!! There is some small portion of the public that we are going to actively try to keep from participating! How is that acceptable or legal?
Thanks for explaining, Will Allen.
Listened to the “panel of experts” on WakeUpCLT.
Did ANY of them do ANY research before they opened their uninv=formed mouths??
They all echoed the “SO recidivism rate is extremely high” mantra. But the blonde was THE worst. How the hell did she get a job in front of a camera??
What good will it do to Sue Facebook? Even if we were to win In court, if we could come up with the funds Facebook would just put a big red flag on your Facebook page saying sexual offender sexual predator. Just like they do your driver’s license and everything else in the state of Florida .
Has anyone checked the current California law and the current terms of service for Facebook? Facebook‘s terms of service used to say in all disputes California law applies. Doesn’t California law prohibit the exclusion or denial of things like business services to people on the sex offender registry? Facebook and most certainly Instagram had become critical business services in a number of industries.
Wouldn’t you rather have the money spent on something to actually improve your life? Like fight the Florida Registry. That would be worth contributing to.