Slashdot Mirror
Supreme Court Rules Sex Offenders Can't Be Barred From Social Media (gizmodo.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Gizmodo: In a unanimous decision today, the Supreme Court struck down a North Carolina law that prevents sex offenders from posting on social media where children might be present, saying it "impermissibly restricts lawful speech." In doing so, the Supreme Court asserted what we all know to be true: Posting is essential to the survival of the republic. The court ruled that to "foreclose access to social media altogether is to prevent the user from engaging in the legitimate exercise of First Amendment rights." The court correctly noted that "one of the most important places to exchange views is cyberspace." The North Carolina law was ruled to be overly broad, barring "access to what for many are the principal sources for knowing current events, checking ads for employment, speaking and listening in the modern public square, and otherwise exploring the vast realms of human thought and knowledge."
My local police (like many in the US) has a special web page showing convicted sex offenders.
My neighbor is on the list ... for having sex with his wife. At the time, he was 18 and she was 15. Her parents disapproved and called the police to break up the relationship. He got probation, but still went on the list for life. They were married on her 18th birthday. Her parents didn't come to the wedding.
Because he is a "child molestor" he cannot go to PTA meetings, parent-teacher conferences, or even step foot in a school.
Their son is my son's best friend. Do I worry about him playing at their house? Of course not.
I am not sure if the sex offender list is a good or bad idea in principle, but the way it is actually implemented is idiotic.