There have been more than a thousand such convictions in North Carolina alone.
The Packingham case has become a First Amendment cause célèbre, and judging from the oral arguments the court may well reverse his conviction on those grounds.
What drives this extraordinary raft of regulations is a pervasive and resilient belief that sex offenders are extremely likely to repeat their crimes.
And despite the fact that the data and the science say otherwise, lawyers and politicians continue to invoke this shibboleth to justify their attempts to curtail the rights of people on the sex-offender registry.
Selector .selector_input_interaction .selector_input. Selector .selector_input_interaction .selector_spinner.
After serving a sentence of two years probation, he was required to register as a sex offender.
Nearly a decade later, Packingham was arrested again, after he posted on Facebook that a traffic ticket he had received had been dismissed.
The problem is this: The recidivism statistics the court cites are dead wrong as a matter of social scientific fact. She is in fact married and living with a registered sex offender in Red Bluff. I say it's pretty amazing that she works with children and can still find acceptance in her heart to love someone that victimized a child. I believe there is a preschool teacher in Corning, Red Bluff or Chester area that goes by the name of Linda Craig or Holmstrom. I don't get the mentality that the people around offenders need to suffer too?But we have a right to expect that when our high court rules, it does so based on real science, not imagined or “alternative” facts.Sadly, while the Packingham case offered a terrific opportunity to re-examine the profound and deeply embedded error in our sex-offender jurisprudence, the only person in the courtroom who addressed the issue of recidivism at all was North Carolina’s Deputy Attorney General Robert Montgomery.