ACLU Files Injunction Against New Sex Offender Residency Restriction

Arguing that a recently-passed law that expanded the distance sex offenders can’t live in proximity to schools from 300 to 1,000 feet is unconstitutional, the Rhode Island chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a class action lawsuit today in U.S. District Court.

The suit, which seeks a restraining order to stop the law’s enforcement, is in response to the “unconstitutionally vague” law that “violates due process, retroactively punishes those who have already completed their sentences, and interferes with liberty and privacy interests while bearing no rational relationship to a legitimate purpose,” said ACLU cooperating lawyers Lynette Labinger and John E. MacDonald, in a statement.

The law, championed by Cranston Rep. Joseph McNamara, was passed without much discussion in the general assembly and its enforcement has raised question about the effectiveness of the law as many settled sex offenders who had addresses that police could visit have been forced into homelessness.

Some law enforcement officials have said that it’s much harder to track and monitor registered sex offenders when they are living on the street rather than a registered address.

According to the ACLU, one of the six plaintiffs named in the suit had just 36 hours to move and has been living in various motels. Three who lived in Providence have until Monday to move or faced felony penalties but haven’t been able to find housing. Another found three potential apartments to rent but they all are within 1,000 feet of a school.

“Most of the individuals will be soon be forced to move into Harrington Hall in Cranston, the only homeless shelter in the state accepting sex offenders that is not within 1,000 feet of a school,” the ACLU said in a statement.

The lawsuit argues that the law is unconstitutionally vague and violates due process because it fails to define a school, does not establish a clear methodology for measuring 1,000 feet, and does not provide any exemptions or appeals process for those affected. In emphasizing the irrationality of the law, the suit notes that it applies to all Level 3 sex offenders, even if their crime was committed against an adult and even though the overwhelming majority of sex offenses are committed against people the offender knows, not strangers.

In fact, the data makes it clear that the fear of a child predator attacking a child near a school or preying on a random child is more urban myth than anything. The overwhelming majority of sex offenses occur within the confines of a private residence and most victims are related to the victimizer.

Now, with sex offenders being forced onto the street, residents must ask themselves if they’d rather police know where offenders live or if they’d rather they live transiently.

“We believe that this law is unconstitutional on its face and deeply flawed from a public safety standpoint. Numerous empirical studies have consistently shown that these residency restrictions do not prevent crimes but simply increase homelessness and lesson public safety,” MacDonald said.

According to the ACLU, advocates from the Rhode Island Coalition for the Homeless (RICH), OpenDoors, and House of Hope CDC joined the ACLU in announcing the filing of the suit. The organizations noted that by pushing individuals out of their homes and limiting where they can live, the law encourages homelessness. The effect is to make it more difficult for law enforcement to monitor them and for offenders to reintegrate themselves into the community. By disrupting vital rehabilitative services, the groups argued, the law increases, rather than decreases, risks to public safety.

Jim Ryczek, executive director of RICH, added: “This new law not only imposes a stronger barrier to overcome to help homeless shelter residents obtain housing, but threatens to increase the number of shelter residents by eliminating the stable housing they have and causing them to enter an already overcrowded homeless shelter system.”

For full copy of the suit, go here: http://riaclu.org/news/post/aclu-files-class-action-suit-challenging-residency-restriction-injunction-s