TN: Tennessee’s legal struggles with its sex offender registry could cost taxpayer

Source: 10/29/23

NOTE: since we posted this article the website blocked it with pay-only access


Dozens of people have scored legal wins against Tennessee’s sex offender registry law since federal judges ruled it violates constitutional protections against retroactive punishment. The situation could cost Tennessee taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney fees.

Judges have repeatedly ruled against the law, and a recent development has made it so those with convictions from more than 20 years ago can be removed in a matter of weeks if they can afford it.  

How we got here
U.S. District Judge Eli Richardson first ruled in February 2021 that those who committed a qualifying crime before the registry’s creation by the General Assembly in 2004 were being subjected to punishment that didn’t exist when they were convicted, which violates the ex post facto clause of the U.S. Constitution.

After that, the state continued to suffer losses in court.

Things reached a tipping point in March of this year, when District Judge Aleta A. Trauger wrote in a decision that past rulings “definitely suggest” that “Tennessee’s policy of continuing to apply the Act to other individuals who committed pre-enactment offenses is unconstitutional.

The state of Tennessee appealed Trauger’s decision to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in March, arguing that placement on the sex offender registry is not punitive and thus not unconstitutional.

Read the full article with paid access 



Related posts

Notify of

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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  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
  19. 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.
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

NOTE: since we posted this article the website blocked it with pay-only access


Getting rid of the registry is a great way to save taxpayers money! Tennessee you can be the first state to volunteer giving up the golden goose or you can spoon your way to more lawsuits

Why do they say “could cost taxpayer”? Obviously it has already cost them plenty. Who the hell do they think is paying for the attorneys, legislators, judges, law enforcement, etc.? And dearly.

Further, the Registries have cost them huge amounts in ways that I’m sure the Registry A**holes couldn’t even conceive. Or care, for that matter.

Wow, that is slightly huge, but how does that mean anything in terms of the Federal SORNA placing the duty and liability to register on the individual regardless of the state’s exemption?