City of Orange’s Halloween law for sex offenders challenged in court

Admin

LA Times – A city law requiring registered sex offenders to post a sign in front of their homes on Halloween to discourage trick-or-treaters is unconstitutional and should be tossed out, a federal lawsuit alleges.

Registered sex offenders in the city of Orange are legally required to post a 12-by-24 inch sign reading “no candy or treats at this residence.” Violators face a $1,000 fine or six months in jail.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday on behalf of the California Reform Sex Offender Laws group, alleges that the city violates 1st Amendment rights and puts registered sex offenders, as well as anyone living with them, at risk of physical and emotional harm. Full Article

Additional Coverage on: KTLA – OC Weekly

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

2 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

California RSOL thanks attorney Chance Oberstein for his willingness to be interviewed today by several news outlets, including KTLA-TV! He helped us all by educating the public in a very public way.

0
Reply

I can personally tell you that if I lived in one of the areas that has this requirement that I would not do it. I would gladly get arrested so that I could fight such as clearly unnecessary and clearly stupid requirement.

I would gladly NOT answer my door that night…after all I will be the first to admit that I find children annoying and I gladly avoid contact with them voluntarily! There is not need to require it in my case.

I do NOT live in one of those backwater places that has nothing better to do than harass law biding sex offenders I am very glad I do not. I live in the city of West Hollywood. If I DID however, this is one of those things I would certainly fight in court!

0
Reply