NC: Appeals court rejects challenge to North Carolina sex offender registration law

Source: portcitydaily.com 8/12/24

Three judges on the Fourth Circuit of Appeals unanimously upheld the constitutionality of North Carolina’s sex offender registry statute against a lawsuit from two organizations based in the state.

The National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws, headquartered in Raleigh, and its state-affiliate North Carolina for Rational Sexual Offense Laws joined anonymous plaintiffs John Doe 1 and 2 in the case. Plaintiffs first sued in 2017 to challenge amendments in the state’s sex offender registration statute and reduce sex offender restrictions and the length of registration terms. The groups argued state law is excessively punitive and fails to protect public welfare. 

North Carolina’s law prohibits registered offenders from employment in positions supervising or involving children and restricts visitation and residence near areas such as playgrounds or schools. Sex offenders are registered for 30 years but can petition to end registration after 10 years. Severe offenses can be punished with lifetime registration.

Chief Judge Albert Diaz wrote the majority opinion after the court reviewed evidence regarding recidivism rates and limited opportunities for sex offenders. Judges found the requirements are not excessively punitive and provide important public safety benefits.

Read the full article

 

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.  
 

45 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

These are 3 judges who need to be schooled on the Constitution and/or be removed from the bench!

“Duty to register” = SERVITUDE (WITHOUT COMPENSATION + ANNUAL MANDATORY ‘FREEDOM’ FEE) = SLAVERY = PUNISHMENT.

The courts requiring us to establish burden-of-proof that the registry demonstrates and meets the threshold of punishment – IS punishment.

Read this other day when it was posted and just had to SMH in disagreement and wonder as it is NC and the 4th, so what else is new with closed minds there?

Have to also wonder what journalistic ethic is fulfilled when the reporter does a deep dive on Robin to go back 20+ years in his career and feels it is print worthy when it adds nada to the article and only smears him in print for the public to read. Ends up going from discussing the case and its details to a hit piece on him personally. Uncalled for. […]

Smith v. Doe rearing its ugly head again. I hope NARSOL can further appeal, ideally up to the USSC. There should be plenty of basis for it – a conflict of opinion between the circuits is usually one of the main criteria for the USSC to accept a case and this opinion directly conflicts with Does v. Snyder.

I’d be really interested in reading the minority opinion here. May try to look it up after work tonight.

If a registry is so good at protecting the public and preventing crime, where is the DUI registry?
Where is the narcotics registry? Where is the murder registry? Where is the robbery registry,etc?

I’m surprised that nobody who lives or owns rental property next door to a PFR – – or those who find themselves living in a de facto PFR Zone – – has sued the government on the basis that the registry is punishment to them as well. Lower property values, lower rent, the mental health issues and trauma involved with knowing about a neighbor’s past, etc.

In my poor neighborhood there are 52 of us in a mile radius. In my friend’s wealthy zip code there are one or two. Surely there’s a class action lawsuit regarding economic or racial inequality somewhere.

For vast majority of sex crimes I will bet people would choose their pocketbooks over maps and those big red dots that surely destroy property values and lower rental income.

Regarding punishment,
maybe a judge would see things different if he or she understood and appreciated all the collateral damage suffered by the immediate neighbors.

Again, I firmly believe that as long as judges can interpret the Constitution based on popular opinion we will never truly be free in this country.

Even in America, there are those who crave and lust after power and control. And they have found the outlet to be “judicial interpretation.” A few justices agree one way in one part of the country and another group agree another in a different part of the country. But no matter what, they all agree that they are not servants of the people nor impartial. And their opinions serve only select groups to the complete detriment of others.

So, this is why I believe the Registry will never end. We are a stupid generation of people who never truly knew struggle and hardship (the simple act of eating food for example) which could only be avoided through unity of purpose.

We do not sufficently unite against this concerted political agenda.

I still plan on retiring far away from here. Where nobody knows my name.

Incredibly discouraging: “Judges found the requirements are not excessively punitive and provide important public safety benefits.”

How can any intelligent person say the requirements are not punitive? Even if you believe all the other trash about public safety, how can anyone make that statement with a straight face? That’s a boldface lie, and they know it.

If what I’m reading is true, the court said it was not (excessively punitive) ?
Then they just admitted it was punitive, just not excessively !

Sorry to have such a negative outlook, but we all know that big government wants the registries to stay as they are and the courts are with them. Challenges don’t work. There are too many political consequences for anyone who supports changes for the better so nothing will change. That is why the only option is to leave the US as I did

What I found interesting about this article was comments by the Sheriff’s Dept detective and the 4th Circuit both admitting that the restrictions are burdensome. Looking over a long span of rulings by the 4th, the most conservative circuit in the country, this language is actually a change from prior rulings. It appears the 4th is finally getting the message, albeit very slowly, that there is an issue with these laws. This is not a total loss despite how it appears on its face.