Marion County, Arkansas, posted signs on the front door of registrants last year identifying those individuals as people required to register as a sex offender. The signs stayed in place not for one day, but for about two weeks – a week before Halloween, Halloween and then a week after Halloween.
This Halloween sign requirement was not a state law. In fact, it was not a county law. Instead, it was a decision by a county sheriff who printed signs with his name on it.
Implementation of the Halloween sign requirement in Marion County was different than Halloween sign requirements in most locations. In most locations, registrants were required to create a sign and then post it on their home. In Marion County, however, the signs were created by the government and then posted by the government on the front door of people’s homes.
When a deputy sheriff arrived to post a Halloween sign on the front door of the plaintiff’s home, he objected to the sign and asserted that his First Amendment rights would be violated by that sign. The deputy sheriff flippantly stated, if you don’t like the sign, then sue us.
Fortunately, that’s exactly what the plaintiff did. He called ACSOL and asked that a lawsuit be filed challenging the Halloween sign requirement.
After the lawsuit was filed in federal court, the attorney representing the sheriff’s office argued to the judge that the posting of the Halloween sign was voluntary. The judge’s reply is one to be remembered. He asked if posting a sign is voluntary when the person posting it is wearing both a gun and a badge.
Shortly after that hearing, Marion County decided to settle the case. In a written agreement, that county has stated they will no longer require registrants in Marion County to have a Halloween sign posted on their residence.
Given that there are only 65 registrants in Marion County, this is a small victory. It is a significant victory, however, because there are other counties in Arkansas as well as cities in other states that require Halloween signs. Those counties and cities now have a choice – stop requiring Halloween signs to be posted on the homes of registrants or be sued in federal court.
Janice, this will have an outsized impact on police who think they can be vigilantes. A solid step for justice!
Great work Janice and ACSOL! I hope ACSOL received attorney fees as part of the settlement.
The injustice of this situation is undeniable. A local Sheriff invents a law, then has his deputies enforce it. Then when confronted, claims this was voluntary? This man “Voluntarily” opened himself up to ridicule, harassment, and vigilantism of every kind? The Sheriffs act criminally, then try to claim that their victim agreed to their criminality?
Even the Sheriff’s excuse is criminal! Not only a lie, but criminally stupid! Maybe this will be noticed by others in the Judiciary? The State does whatever it wants, then can’t even be bothered to concoct a plausible lie about it?
No small victories! Every victory, on every issue, in every court, brings us one step closer to the ultimate victory, the elimination if this abomination!
Why the hell did the plaintiff agree to settle with this one? Screw that this sheriff is a crook.
PFR should have ripped them down and burned them, illegal for some LOSER to post a sign on your PERSONAL PROPERTY PLAIN and SIMPLE, its called TRESPASS and PIGS arent above the law !!
Love this! So glad that they reached out and the case was filed.
Fantastic! Thank you for helping them. I hope registrants in other counties are aware of this and simply refuse to comply. And if the cops push back, they can tell them the same thing these cops said: sue us!
Was there any civil monetary redress for the individual who challenged this and damages incurred?
In a situation like this, could the person take the sign down?
Shouldn’t there be a part of law enforcement officer training wherein they’re told, “Don’t ever say, ‘If you don’t like it, sue us.'”??
😆😆😆
if you dont like it you can sue us, typical igornant response by a hillbilly yet there is no signs moon shine made here, andy and barny of mayberry lives on.
So I have to ask, if the state or local Municipality actually had a law that said the PFR had to post such a notice, doesn’t that make the posting compulsory? In this instance the state and county had no such laws requiring the posting of a notice. But if one lives in a jurisdiction that makes it obligatory, challenging the law by not doing what the statute says could be worse than challenging the statute prima facia in a federal district court. Constitutional challenging is better than failing to follow all registration requirements of a particular jurisdiction. That could mean jail or prison time for not complying.
Now those people need to go after $$$ in a civil lawsuit
Epic line of reasoning right there…if only more rational judges would realize/acknowledge that’s what the entire registry scheme is: just one massive gun pointed straight at the head of every person forced to register (often for life), with a lot of self righteous knuckle draggers on the other side just looking for any excuse to pull the trigger.
I am so thankful to Janice and ACSOL that we don’t have to post any idiotic signs around here. I would never “voluntarily” promote anything that the government wants to say about me, unless there were a legitimate threat that they could actually enforce if I refused to do so.
This may be a small victory…but it sets a precedence that could be used for greater victories in the future, and every success in the courts is more “ammo” for our side to “fire back”.
I remember when I was on probation, they made us go to the probation office and sit there for the whole evening.
The second time I had to do this, one of the POs showed up with a TV crew with no notice.
Some of the PFRs wound up with their faces on TV for the city to see.
Glad Janice is doing good for us.
She needs to come here to AZ and use Powell v. Keel to get rid of the lifetime registration
It is great that ACSOL forced these criminals to stop their crimes. But I hope ACSOL got paid very well for it. THAT is very needed, is it not? These criminal regimes need to feel serious pain. They need consequences. It is a damn shame that many of the criminals cannot be held individually liable. So many sheriffs are simply a**hole criminals.
Couldn’t the plaintiff and ACSOL sue for costs and punitive damages? Make the stupid MFers pay.
Grateful for the victory, but still aggravated that the Halloween sign battle has to be fought yet again when it should have been settled a couple of years ago.
I’m thinking in the next week or two I’m going to write to the editors of local newspapers and stations with a list of questions I’d like to see asked to the inevitable parade of public information officers trying to get fluff pieces published/aired about what great protectors of children they are this Halloween
Every victory is huge considering what we are up against. Great job.
Meanwhile, in Missouri…???
Assuming the Plaintiff was not currently on parole at the time, the Sheriff has violated not only Plaintiff’s First Amendment Rights, but his Fourth Amendment rights and Due Process.
Sheriffs do not have the authority to institute their own laws or regulations for the public, even Registrants.
What I don’t understand is exactly what kept 65 Marion County registrants from ripping the signs down?
Show up at MY door and the first thing I’m asking is do you have a warrant? If not, get off my property. Want to post something? Show me the authoritative Statute or I’m ripping it down. Arrest me for tearing it down? Great, lose your qualified immunity and my law suit triples in size.
At any rate, great victory and kudos to the Plaintiff for standing up for himself.