Sex offenders cannot be made to put up signs at their residences suggesting trick-or-treaters not stop there, according to a new ruling.
A Missouri law that mandated sex offenders post a sign at their residences on Oct. 31 each year saying “No candy or treats at this residence” violates the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, U.S. District Judge John A. Ross stated on Oct. 2.
Sex offender Thomas Sanderson in 2023 sued over the law, which was enacted in 2008, two years after he was convicted.
According to court documents, Sanderson said he held Halloween events for years and was told that the law did not apply to him since it was enacted after his conviction. One year, though, police officers went to his home, arrested him, and charged him with violating the law.
Attorneys for Sanderson said the law was a classic example of compelled speech and infringed on his First Amendment rights.
The law “violates the First Amendment by forcing plaintiff Sanderson to ‘denunciate’ himself, and by forcing plaintiff Sanderson to utter speech that is false, political in nature, and that he does not wish to make,” they said.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said in court filings that the required sign does not qualify as compelled speech, pointing to previous decisions from circuit courts that have found laws such as requiring sex offenders to register their addresses are constitutional if required “for the preservation of an orderly society.”
Ross disagreed, highlighting two circuit courts’ rulings that laws in other states mandating that sex offenders post Halloween signs are unconstitutional. One of those rulings cited a previous decision that ruled people are free to cover the state motto of New Hampshire on their license plates.
State officials through the law “require the use of private property to reflect their own message ‘for the express purpose that it be observed and read by the public,’ thereby depriving registered offenders of their freedom to speak in their own words or to not speak at all,” he added.
The ruling struck down the part of the law that requires sign posting and enjoined law enforcement officials and prosecutors from enforcing it.
“We’re pleased with the ruling and pleased that the court recognizes that people on the registry do indeed have First Amendment rights,” Janice Bellucci, a lawyer representing Sanderson, told The Epoch Times.
“We are examining all legal options, including potential appeals,” a spokesperson for Bailey told The Epoch Times in an email.
