Jeremy from Indiana
This is the best case I’ve read so far as it now has the potential to be used as case law to destroy the entire registry when combining it with the 6th circuit’s and Pennsylvania’s decisions.
I hope they appeal up to the Supreme Court as the 6th circuit did. While the consensus with the staff here at NARSOL seems to believe a win is a win and the only reason the Supreme Court takes a case is with the intention to reverse, I believe they will take this case (and hopefully consolidate with the other cases) for an entirely different reason altogether. This case basically overturned a Supreme Court decision in Smith v. Doe and, similar to Pennsylvania’s decision, declared the federal AWA unconstitutional.
Before this ends up in the Supreme Court next year (I have no doubt at least one of these will), I am hoping that at least one case concerning violations of the FCRA is brought forth to be consolidated as well. While it may not be needed if these cases are heard, it gives our side another argument to present to make our case even stronger.
For those that don’t know what I’m talking about, the FCRA regulates background checks as a “consumer report”. Companies that don’t do background checks can still Google your name and find out about your status which violates the FCRA’s regulations on background checks.
I have been diligently searching for a full time job for some time now and I believe that at least some of my denials are registry based. I got a background check report back from a company recently that only had my registration as the reason for denial rather than the actual charge itself. This is the second time this has happened to me. The first time, I was fired from my job for being a registrant. I plan on fighting it this time. Wish me luck! Maybe mine will be that case.