AL: Alabama defends law limiting where sex offenders can go

Source: courthousenews.com 8/1/25

An Alabama law restricting sex offenders’ movements is under legal scrutiny after a federal appeals court hearing Friday that could reshape how the state regulates their interactions with minors.

The case centers on a provision of the Alabama Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification Act that restricts where registrants can be present, potentially criminalizing routine activities like work, attending church or family gatherings. Amended in 2017, plaintiffs claim the provision redefined “reside” and “overnight visit,” imposing sweeping restrictions that could transform routine activities into criminal acts.

Three registrants sued the state in 2019, gaining a favorable judgment from Senior U.S. District Judge W. Keith Watkins, who found the law overly broad and unconstitutional. In his May 2024 order, Watkins emphasized that while the state has a legitimate interest in protecting the public, especially children, the law’s residency provision goes too far by infringing on fundamental constitutional rights without sufficient justification.

On appeal Friday, Assistant Attorney General Brenton Smith defended the statute, arguing that “the First Amendment does not entitle sex offenders to live with or near unrelated minors, nor does it entitle sex offenders to spend the night with minors outside their own nuclear families.”

Smith argued the law allows ordinary public activity and isn’t as restrictive as claimed.

“Ordinary conduct in worship, singing — whatever it may be at a revival — does not establish a residence at that place,” he argued, maintaining that sex offenders can still attend church and participate in public activities. Smith said plaintiffs have not demonstrated widespread constitutional violations.

“Given the 16,000 approximately sex offenders that live in Alabama, all of whom live somewhere … they have pointed to no prosecutions” that support their…

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 or abbreviate their name. 
  24. Please check for typos, spelling, punctuation, and grammar errors before submitting.  Comments that have many errors will not be approved. 
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.  
 

9 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

So if I’m understanding correctly, the Alabama legislature removed a few words from their statutes specifically to criminalize normal, mundane activity and conduct by registrants, and the AG is offering essentially a pinky promise that his prosecutors won’t take it to extremes.

Right….

I just hope they remember that the case is brought against the law (as written), not against the state’s interpretation of the law. Saw this with the Halloween decorations case where the local pd didn’t enforce the law then they changed their tune. An interpretation can always change and no one would know.

“Free to travel”

Laws are supposed to prevent crime NOT create crime and that is exactly what most of these new laws are doing.
One person said that if ignorance is no excuse, then every American citizen is ignorant and in peril, for nobody can know all the laws that govern their behavior.

Alabama’s amended registry act criminalizes presence, not conduct, by redefining “reside” and “overnight visit” so broadly that attending church, working a night shift, or visiting family may result in felony charges. Church attendance and nightly labor—especially under supervisory oversight—are weaponized by institutions demanding compliance, documentation, and behavioral control, converting routine life into coerced servitude. This violates Federal First Amendment protections by restricting religious freedom and assembly, Federal Fourteenth Amendment guarantees of due process and equal protection through vague and arbitrary enforcement, Federal Thirteenth Amendment protections against involuntary servitude by forcing People into labor and surveillance to avoid unintentional violations, and Federal Ninth Amendment protections of unenumerated rights including the pursuit of happiness, which is obstructed by forced family denial. These laws extend beyond People Forced to Register (PFR): under Alabama’s statute, if a citizen knowingly fails to report a PFR’s presence to law enforcement, they too may face felony charges. Silence becomes criminal, and everyday relationships become prosecutable. Neighbors, churchgoers, supervisors, and bystanders are all vulnerable to this reach. Because one day, a PFR or family member could say they knew—and then you will understand what government overreach truly means. It will be unto yourselves. That is not justice, that is tyranny.
Disclaimer: This statement is intended for survivor-centered advocacy, coalition documentation, and public awareness. It does not constitute legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. Interpretations of law may vary by jurisdiction. References to constitutional violations reflect publicly available rulings and legal arguments, including federal decisions such as Doe v. Marshall. Readers are encouraged to consult qualified legal professionals before taking or refraining from any action. This message is protected as expressive speech under the First Amendment and is offered in pursuit of lawful reform, memorialization, and public education.

Good on the judges who are pointing out that Alabama already broadened the law that infringed upon normal activity for registrants and this newer law is going to push the boundaries even further, making it unconstitutional.

The judge that is for the new limiting laws is often saying qualifiers of “it’s just one factor in the totality of the circumstances analysis”. Which interprets as, “the law is vague and that one factor is all the state needs to persecute and prosecute with the new law.”

Assistant AG Smith seems to be saying that since no one has been harmed or prosecuted by the strict factors of the law, it must be okay. 🤗 Sort of like the passport identifier 😒