{"id":104,"date":"2017-07-20T15:34:39","date_gmt":"2017-07-20T20:34:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/?page_id=104"},"modified":"2019-10-21T15:58:48","modified_gmt":"2019-10-21T20:58:48","slug":"state-of-north-carolina-v-packingham","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2017\/07\/20\/state-of-north-carolina-v-packingham\/","title":{"rendered":"Packingham v. North Carolina (US 2017)"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"introduction-wrapper\">\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\">Packingham v. North Carolina, 137 S.Ct. 1730 (US 2017)<\/h2>\n<p><strong><strong>Nature of Case:\u00a0<\/strong><\/strong>Defendant, a North Carolina registrant, was convicted under a state statute banning anyone on the sex offense registry from using social media. Appealed and intermediate NC Court reversed, striking statute down on First Amendment grounds. State Supreme Court granted review and reversed again, affirming trial court, holding that the law did not upset First Amendment principles. United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Held<\/strong>: North Carolina statute banning those on sex offense registry from using social media unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Decision reversed.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\"><em>Case Documents<\/em><\/h2>\n<ul class=\"default\">\n<li>US Supreme Court\n<ul class=\"default\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Packingham-v.-North-Carolina-Petition-for-Writ-of-Certiorari-SCOTUS.pdf\">Petition for Writ of Certiorari<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/16pdf\/15-1194_08l1.pdf\">U.S. Supreme Court Decision<\/a> | view via <a href=\"https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=285661631352488303&amp;q=137+S.Ct.+1730&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=4000003\">Google Scholar<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Packingham-v-North-Carolina-Reply-Brief-for-Petitioner-SCOTUS.pdf\">Petitioner&#8217;s Reply Brief\u00a0<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Packingham-v.-North-Carolina-Amicus-Curiae-Brief-EPIC-SCOTUS.pdf\">Amicus Curiae Brief &#8211; EPIC, et. al.<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Packingham-v.-North-Carolina-Amicus-Curiae-Brief-Law-Professors-SCOTUS.pdf\">Amicus Curiae Brief &#8211; Law Professors<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Packingham-v.-North-Carolina-Brief-for-Respondent-in-Opposition-SCOTUS.pdf\">Respondent&#8217;s Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Packingham-v.-North-Carolina-Oral-Argument-Transcript-SCOTUS.pdf\">Oral Argument Transcript<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/State-of-North-Carolina-v.-Packingham-Order-on-Petition-for-Writ-of-Supersedeas.pdf\">Order on Petition for Writ of Supersedeas<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>NC Supreme Court\n<ul class=\"default\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Defendant-Appellees-New-Brief.pdf\">Defendant- Appellee&#8217;s Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/States-New-Brief.pdf\">State&#8217;s Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/North-Carolina-Supreme-Court-Opinion.pdf\">North Carolina Supreme Court Opinion<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>NC Court of Appeals\n<ul class=\"default\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Defendant-Appellants-Brief.pdf\">Defendant- Appellant&#8217;s Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Packingham-v.-North-Carolina-State-Brief-Appellate-Court.pdf\">State&#8217;s Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/State-of-North-Carolina-v.-Packingham-Court-of-Appeals-Opinion.pdf\">Court of Appeals Opinion<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\"><em>News and Related Materials<\/em><\/h2>\n<ul class=\"default\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/news\/volokh-conspiracy\/wp\/2017\/07\/03\/supreme-court-unanimously-overturns-north-carolinas-ban-on-social-media-use-by-sex-offenders\/?utm_term=.db57daff5665\">[WaPo] Supreme Court unanimously overturns North Carolina&#8217;s ban on social-media use by sex offenders<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>US Supreme Court decision declaring unconstitutional social media ban targeting people listed on sex offense registry.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2017\/07\/20\/state-of-north-carolina-v-packingham\/\" class=\"more-link\">Packingham v. North Carolina (US 2017)<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":242,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[14,35,221],"class_list":{"0":"post-104","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-sorn-cases","7":"tag-1st-amendment","8":"tag-internet-restrictions","9":"tag-united-states-supreme-court","10":"entry"},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/242"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=104"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=104"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=104"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=104"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}