ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

General News

SCOTUS Symposium: Packingham and Fact-Checking the Supreme Court

Last week’s decision in Packingham v. North Carolina is getting a lot of attention in part because of this fact checker column in the Washington Post. Packingham involved a challenge to a North Carolina law that severely restricted the ability of registered sex offenders to access various websites, including Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter. All eight participating Justices agreed that the law violated the First Amendment because it was unable to satisfy intermediate scrutiny. Although the Court acknowledged that protecting children from sex offenders was a legitimate government interest, the law burdened more speech than was necessary to further that legitimate interest. Full Analysis

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. 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.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. 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.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
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.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I am glad so called “sex offender recidivism” myth is gaining some attentions lately based on Samuel Alito latest misleading statement in the packingham case. Great job on WaPo for posting that info!

Packingham, both the case and the man himself, has done more for our cause than any other recent activity that I can recall. It has brought the discussion plainly into major media, and the truths are being told. Hopefully we can build on this with a nice 7-2 (Alito, Thomas..tho he seems to be sliding towards more and more civil liberties) on Snyder in the next term!

I think if/when the scores of restrictions on residency and presence are taken away due to being punitive, the “fun” of the registry will fade and funding with it. I really think that’s where we’re headed, thankfully. I’m not confident enough yet to believe registries will ever go away or be non-public, though.


Packingham was an important victory. And this article/analysis was certainly an enjoyable read. Thanks for posting it.👍

So the study the article uses is the 1994 study. Granted it has when commited against a child, but the newest study should be the one used which was dated 2016 with a study from 2005-2010.

It took me a little digging to find this on the DOJ website. I guess they, in part they want it that way.
Someone should send this link to the author of the article.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x