Winners in Florida: First amendment rights, removal of “Sexual Predator” from driver’s licenses
By Stephen . . . The Florida 5th District Court of Appeals struck down the state driver’s license
designation of labeled Sexual Predator as compelled speech in a 2-1 decision, citing earlier wins in AL and LA over the same compelled speech issue.
The designation of SEXUAL PREDATOR on a personal driver license, however, is the type of compelled speech that is a step too far as the Louisiana Supreme Court and an Alabama federal court have held. The availability of numbers, symbols, or codes in various colors and fonts, as an example, shows a lack of narrow tailoring and that the government’s compelling interest in protecting the public can be achieved without compelling speech impermissibly.
While the ruling declared unconstitutional sections 322.212(5)(c) and 322.141(3)(a), Florida
Statutes(2021), the ruling is stayed and held in abeyance pending an appeal to the Florida Supreme Court asking the following question:
Does the requirement that a Florida driver license contain the designation SEXUAL PREDATOR for those persons within that category constitute compelled speech that is unconstitutional under the strict scrutiny test?
The Florida Supreme Court would have to go against every finding to date, both federally and at the state level, to overturn this decision. We shall see.
Definitely a step in the right direction. I am eager to see how this unfolds. Florida is definitely the state that likes to take its Registry laws to the extreme, and if the State didn’t automatically file appeals in cases it loses, I would still expect it to do so in cases pulling back restrictions it places on those forced to register.
Keep up the good work in Florida, if gains can be made in that state alone, then there is hope for the rest of the country!
Compelled speech was part of the deal obfuscated in Smith V Doe when reviewing SOR which implications indicates a use of a gov database. It was Congress itself which lent favorable rules to purveyors of the computer database properties. (In all its forms) Like the peoples’ intent behind the addition to the drivers license, the clear label, is about the imposing of additional affirmative restraint.
Without question the win here is based on the intent behind the drivers license itself. The purpose of states mandating the qualification ” to lawfully operate a motor vehicle” is in no reasonable way tied to the intent behind sex predator notice.
While each is about an effort toward public safety, their individual purposes are mutually exclusive. How a congressman and especially a senator can fail to recognize the fact is beyond me. In my opinion, only a devout Sewer Socialist would approve of such actions. No rancher in his right mind would advertise the worst of his heard on a world wide scale! Well except for the bankrupted rancher.