California Supreme Court invalidating blanket imposition of residential banishment laws to those convicted of sex offenses and and parole.
7th Circuit Case affirming dismissal of constitutional claims brought against Illinois' residence restrictions, inter alia, Ex Post Facto, Takings Clause, and both Substantive and Procedural Due Process arguments.
Federal civil suit alleging that village's residency restrictions were equivalent to banishment and thus violated ex post facto as well as equal protection. Held that residency restrictions were unconstitutional.
California Supreme Court affirmed holding of lower court ruling on state habeas that blanket enforcement of California's residency restrictions violated Due Process under the 14th Amendment.
5th Circuit case affirming lower court grant of summary judgment to city in re challenge ordinance restricting where those on the registry may reside based on due process and equal protection.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court opinion declaring unconstitutional local ordinance restricting where people on the registry may live on the grounds of preemption.
Seventh Circuit affirmed district court's grant of summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity to state officials on monetary claims that state law which allowed for continued detention of plaintiff past his maximum release date due to inability to locate housing.
Indiana Supreme Court opinion affirming trial court dismissal of charges against person required to register for violating statewide residence restrictions on state constitutional grounds.
New York Court of Appeals held that doctrine of field preemption meant that counties could not enact their own ordinances restricting where people on the sex offense registry could reside.
Ohio Supreme Court decision holding that residence restrictions could not be applied retroactively where, under state law, absent clear indication from legislature that law was intended to be applied retroactively, it could only operate prospectively.