IL: Sex offender internet law constitutional

SPRINGFIELD — The state’s highest court has upheld a law that requires sex offenders to disclose information about their internet identities and websites.

In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Charles E. Freeman, the Illinois Supreme Court held that a provision of the Sex Offender Registration Act survived First Amendment scrutiny because it bolsters the government’s interest in protecting the public without restricting more speech than necessary.

In an 18-page opinion issued this morning, the court critiqued a handful of federal district courts who have found similar statutes unconstitutional and wrote that although sex offender laws can have “a lasting and painful effect” on those they regulate, those consequences stem from the convictions rather than forced disclosure of their personal information. Full Article

Supreme Court Opinion

Related posts

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.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Every citizen should be up in arms about this ruling. It violates basic rights of the few which in turn threatens the rights of everyone. There should not exist a registry separate from probation and parole. The nature of the registry is a form of informal probation and parole without being named such.

Lions and tigers and bears, oh my, lol. You know, I kinda agree with trump, the idea of America is over. This decision is only one reflection of it. The court claimed it did not rise to the level of strict scrutiny claiming it did not involve the content of his speech. That’s just legal nonsense, it requires him by force to tell the government all terms and words related to the CONTENT of his image, ideas, and identification. Moreover, they will use it to monitor the CONTENT of his speech for criminal activity and solely for using the internet. This judge has no clue about the meaning of law or freedom of speech. some people are not qualified to be judges. He simply read someone else’s opinion and used it.

Any reasonable analysis and interpretation of the freedom of speech would require these requirements to be deemed unconstitutional. This decision is an absurdity of law, it even claims that the forced actions are not a precondition of speech, lol. Wow, this guy and all others similarly situated cannot use the internet unless they tell the govt their internet information or go to jail, now if that’s not a precondition of speech, then what is? You see no one that thinks would go along with this indefensible position, except for a traitor. That’s right, I call it as I see it, he’s a traitor to the constitution.

Moreover, for the govt to have authority to regulate a person, he must be exercising a privilege, or he is being punished. Registrations have been declared neither by the u.s. scrotus, oops scrotum. Therefore, the federal govt has no legal powe to regulate him. Man, they should all be hanged for treason. This is not a failure in judgement, this decision is clearly biased, discrimination, and illegal in every respect. He should not be allowed to be a judge. Period. He’s hideous anyways, probably a closet deviant and a disgusting example of humanity.

I’m so tired of it all, I wish Russia nuked us.

Knowing Illinois, in my opinion, people were paid off to get a ruling like this. That state is a mess. Look at Chicago! It has the annual death toll of Baghdad, and it’s getting worse. Yet they have money to prosecute a guy for making a post on Facebook?!?!?! Are you effing kidding me?????

Was Judge Freeman actually able to keep a straight face as he wrote the freeze-dried bullcrap in that decision?

“The way they phrased that to me seems to leave the door open to further development of that issue on remand,” Kimmel said. “So to me that means something. That’s helpful.”

Maybe a small flicker of a light at the end of the tunnel?

Fingers cross they appeal to SCOTUS who corrects the mistake they made in smith v doe

It’s a pretty lame opinion that takes the Smith v. Doe track of frightening and high recidivism. While the opinion does do a head nod to the disagreement as to the utility of such laws, they punt back to the legislative branch, stating that they are in a better position to be able to determine the best course of action with complex problems.

Where does that leave a hugely unpopular group of people? Whom can they petition for redress, if the courts blithely accept, at face value, the assertions of the legislature no matter how ridiculous they become? The judiciary is supposed to be an independent check on the legislature, but in this one area of law, courts seem all too eager to abandon their role as a safeguard against a legislature that is eat up with hysteria.

As Learned Hand once commented, liberty lies in the hearts of men and women, and when it dies there, no law, no constitution can do much to help it.

If the law has been around that long, then to prove it isn’t serving a legitimate purpose all one has to do is ask how law enforcement has used that information to protect the public over the years.

They obviously don’t do anything with it but log it or file it.

It’s just another law to burden sex offenders for no reason, because when someone actually uses the internet to do something illegal, they aren’t going to report it anyway! What is the expectation of the benefit of the law? Oh, yes, we went though this sex offenders list of message boards he chats on and found him communicating with an underage girl talking about meeting up for sex! Yeah…that’s going to happen, and be self-reported.

I suppose they can justify it by saying, “Well, now we can charge that person with communicating with a minor to engage in sexual activity as well as failure to register and lock them away even longer!”.

I’m not shocked by the ruling, my only thoughts would be how to throw it back in their faces.

We should start are own social Media site and then ban all members of the Government from Entry in the terms of service, then we can File a civil suit if any cops enter it for any reason.

I live in Michigan,but if i were you guys i would ask your ACLU to get involved,our ACLU did,and it was ruled that it violates the first amendment,and also The 6th circuit has ruled that Michigan’s expos facto and other stipulations violate Michigan’s Constitution,and The United States Constitution. I would start looking in to this matter ASAP,if i were you guys.

Looks like he copied the Tenth Circuits decision in Doe v. Shurtleff. I say appeal. Every Court since Shurtleff has ruled it unconstitutional.

They wonder why so many RSO’s risk being caught for failing to register…. The BS just keeps getting deeper. This is total BS.

I know a legal team cost money and many of us are living paycheck to paycheck but with 800,000 RSO’s if we all pitched in $5.00 each I am sure we could come up with a hell of a lot of money to hire a hell of a legal team to fight this shit once and for all..

Most all of these LAWS are a violation of the Bill of Attainder, IML, and AWA, SORA, Are all directed at an easily ascertainable group inflicting rules, guidlines, restrictions whatever you want to call it (punishment) without a judge, jury or even a way to challenge it under due process.

A bill of attainder is defined by the Supreme Court as a legislative act which inflicts punishment on named individuals or members of an easily ascertainable group without a judicial trial.

Read it:

Get Pissed guys and gals.. lets get our friends and family pissed lets get all the RSO’s that are out there hiding just “living” scared to say anything to join.

I personally know a few RSO’s that are “scared’ to fight the system but I keep on them to join the fight. Yes a few RSO’s are easy for the courts to discard and ignore. Lets file the next suit with 800,000 signatures and see them ignore that.

Bill of Attainder is where we need to be directing the fight!!!!

Amazing how easily the court dismissed what other courts have done regarding registration, including the Sixth Circuit and Ninth Circuit. I just pulled up Doe v. Harris where the Ninth Circuit ruled the California requirement to give email and Internet ID unconstitutional. Strong ruling in just the opposite direction. Too bad IL is not in the Sixth Circuit. Hope they appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

After reading the registration requirements in IL, I will never go there. They consider anyone who moves into the state with a requirement to registers elsewhere a sexual Predator, having to register for life. That seems on its face to be an equal protection issue. Remember, Obama was a state senator from IL.

It’s time to park our asses on Pennsylvania ave in Washington, d.c. for a month.

This frightening and high belief is nothing but a myth. They might as well require all who do not believe in Santa Claus to give up there identifiers. What else would you call believing what is not there and not requiring proof? The government is establishing a religion and this court is upholding it.