A Normal man whose sexual abuse case is at the center of a legal debate over whether sex offenders should have access to the internet was back in court Monday, after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review his case. Full Article
Related posts
-
Meta cracks down on teen “sextortion” on Facebook, Instagram
Source: arstechnica.com 11/21/22 Teens will finally have a way to proactively stop the spread of intimate... -
FBI finds sharp rise in online extortion of teens tricked into sending sexually explicit photos
Source: pbs.org 12/19/22 WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI sounded the alarm Monday about an explosive increase... -
NE: Dodge County sex offenders face challenges in registering
Source: fremonttribune.com 12/20/22 Convicted sex offenders in Fremont and Dodge County are required to register with...

It sounds like this guy is going to have to sue in Federal Court, since the kangaroo-court that is the IL SC has improperly ruled. As discussed shortly after Packingham, the State must show a compelling interest in prohibiting his access, any law must be narrowly tailored, and other less burdensome means must first be used. Also, he has a right to anonymous online speech from previous SCOTUS case law. What part does IL SC not understand?!
I’m a little confused about the time line for this case versus Packingham. Did SCOTUS deny cert to this case before or after granting cert and/or deciding Packingham? When did the IL Supreme Court render their judgement?