Reply To: North Carolina versus First Amendment: SCOTUS to decide


This was submitted to the counsel for petitioner. It was forwarded to the person arguing the case before the SCOTUS.

In light of the fact that the state’s primary arguing point defending N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 14-202.5 is the supposed protection of minors on social media, I would strenuously point out that this primary argument lacks sufficient weight and justification due, to a large extent, to the following:

A. Any and all sex offender registries and the codes/laws that constitute sex offender registration requirements can only affect those persons who are subject to such codes/laws.

B. The vast majority of sex-related offenses (convictions) are committed by those persons who are not in sex offender registries nor subject to sex offender-related codes/laws.

C. The recidivism rate (subsequent convictions related to offenses against minors) of those who were previously convicted of offenses related to minors is very low.

D. Therefore, sex offender registries, and also registration laws/requirements, do very little to prevent future sex-related offenses. This of course includes the North Carolina law prohibiting ex-sex offenders from using or accessing the bulk of social media websites.

The above can be used to argue the following:

A. The making of laws should consider if such proposed laws will substantially fulfill their purpose and if they will create greater evil(s) than they can potential solve.

B. N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 14-202.5 does not substantially fulfill its purpose. It also creates greater evils than it can potential solve. This is due to the fact that:

1. N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 14-202.5 does extremely little to prevent future sex-related offenses against minors as pertains to social media use.

2. Its implementation comes with a serious price tag to North Carolina’s tax payers while doing little to fulfill its intent and purpose of preventing harm to minors as pertains to social media use.

a. Such wasted money could be better spent on supporting the state’s youth in other effective and productive ways.

3. It creates a totally unnecessary burden on registered ex-sex offenders who are attempting to live as productive and law-abiding members of society in an attempt to meet society’s expectation of rehabilitation and integration.

a. The N.C. law and other similar laws make it nearly impossible for many ex-sex offenders to have any real hope of fulfilling such expectations and living productive, law-abiding lives. This lack of hope has serious practical, emotional and mental ramifications for former sex offenders, which of course also directly and negatively impacts society.

b. These negative consequences work counter to the very intent and purpose of sex offender laws in both North Carolina and in the other states.