Original Article08/10/2011
By Laura Maggi
Lawyers for the state on Wednesday continued their push to defend a Louisiana law that requires some people convicted of selling sex for money to register as sex offenders, but not others.
During oral arguments, U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman continually pressed Assistant Attorney General Phyllis Glazer on why the law does not require all people convicted of selling sex to register as sex offenders.
"How is that not a violation of the equal protection clause?" Feldman asked, referring to the constitutional requirement that laws be applied equally to all people.
- I agree, and the draconian sex offender registry and residency restrictions, should also be applied to other criminals as well. If it's fair for one group, it's fair for all.
Glazer responded that the state requires all people convicted of soliciting "crimes against nature" to register regardless of their race, gender or religion.
Historically under Louisiana law, people convicted of selling oral or anal sex could be prosecuted either under prostitution laws or the state's unique "crimes against nature by solicitation" statute. If convicted under that law, the defendant would be required to register as a sex offender. People convicted of prostitution, which can involve the same sex acts, were never required to register.
In February, the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a lawsuit challenging the law, arguing it is unconstitutional. During the recent legislative session, the state lawmakers agreed, removing the registration requirement for anyone convicted of crimes against nature in the future.
The new law, which goes into effect on Tuesday, only applies prospectively. Attorneys supporting the challenge say about 400 people will remain on the sex offender registry because of their previous convictions for soliciting crimes against nature.
- Yep, the sex offender registry is about to get larger.
In New Orleans, almost 40 percent of people registered as sex offenders are there because of crimes against nature convictions. About 75 percent of these people are women, according to the original lawsuit against the law.
Feldman asked Glazer, who filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit against the state, about why there isn't an equal protection issue raised by the fact that people convicted of a crime against nature in the past will be treated differently than those who are convicted of the same acts after the new law goes into effect on Aug. 15.
- Um, you are a lawyer, and that would be an unconstitutional ex post facto law.
"The August 15th date to me seems pivotal," Feldman said.
Glazer responded that the Legislature simply didn't have enough money to make the law retroactive. It would be expensive for Louisiana State Police to review the cases of any people on the sex offender registry to ensure they were solely convicted of crimes against nature by solicitation, she said.
- And like mentioned above, anything done to retroactively punish people, is unconstitutional!
A fiscal note attached to the original version of the bill, which did make the law retroactive, estimated it would cost about $37,000 annually to hire an analyst to review the files. The note also said the Department of Public Safety and Corrections indicated that the department could have current personnel perform the work, but it might slow them down on other tasks.
Alexis Agathocleous, an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights, said his clients want Feldman to issue an injunction requiring the state to remove them from the registry.
Feldman ordered both sides to submit further written briefs about the issues, saying he will rule at a later date.
