Packingham v. North Carolina
GPTKB entity
Statements (139)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
| gptkbp:argued_on |
Chilling effect on free speech
Violation of due process rights Potential for misuse of laws against marginalized groups Disproportionate impact on rehabilitation efforts Evolving nature of technology and communication Failure to consider modern communication methods First Amendment as a cornerstone of democracy First Amendment protections apply to all citizens Impact on family and community connections Importance of online engagement for reintegration Importance of protecting individual freedoms Importance of protecting minority rights Inconsistent with other legal precedents Infringement on public discourse Lack of alternative means for communication Lack of evidence for public safety concerns Need for clear guidelines on restrictions Need for judicial oversight of state laws Need for legal clarity in digital age Need for proportionality in legal restrictions Overbroad restriction on speech Potential for arbitrary enforcement Potential for rehabilitation through social media Recognition of changing societal norms Recognition of digital citizenship Social media as a platform for expression Social media as a public forum Social media as a tool for advocacy Social media as a vital communication tool State's interest must be narrowly tailored Unconstitutionally vague law Need for balanced approach to public safety and free speech Recognition of the role of technology in modern life Potential for discrimination against certain groups Need for a balanced approach to law enforcement and rights Importance of public discourse in a democratic society Need for comprehensive review of laws affecting speech |
| gptkbp:case_analysis |
Used as a case study in law schools
Analyzed under strict scrutiny standard Used in law schools for constitutional law courses Broader implications for civil liberties Relevant to internet law Examined balance of rights and state interests Relevant to ongoing discussions about internet freedom Analyzed for its implications on free speech rights. |
| gptkbp:case_number |
Documented in legal databases
Involved a registered sex offender Involved prior convictions Originated from a North Carolina law Involved a registered sex offender's access to social media |
| gptkbp:case_outcome |
Set a precedent for future cases
Expanded First Amendment protections Majority opinion emphasized free speech Struck down as unconstitutional Influenced public policy discussions Affirmed right to access social media Unanimous decision on free speech grounds Unconstitutional restriction Changed how states regulate online behavior for offenders Ruling favored individual rights over state restrictions Court found law overly broad and vague Impact on state and federal law interpretations Set a standard for evaluating similar laws Significant for civil liberties advocates Unconstitutional restriction on free speech |
| gptkbp:case_significance |
Landmark ruling on digital rights
Significant for digital rights advocacy. Significant for First Amendment protections |
| gptkbp:case_types |
gptkb:Constitution
Constitutional law case |
| gptkbp:championship |
6-3
|
| gptkbp:consequences |
Influenced state laws on internet access
Influenced state laws on sex offender internet use Reevaluation of sex offender laws Implications for future legislation on digital access |
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
June 19, 2017 |
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Neil_Gorsuch
gptkb:Justice_Samuel_Alito gptkb:Justice_Clarence_Thomas |
| gptkbp:economic_policy |
Influenced public policy on sex offender laws
|
| gptkbp:effective_date |
June 19, 2017
|
| gptkbp:election |
6-3
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Packingham v. North Carolina
|
| gptkbp:impact |
Influenced state laws on social media restrictions
|
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
Frequently referenced in legal arguments
Subsequent court cases Frequently cited in legal discussions 582 U. S. 98 (2017) |
| gptkbp:is_debated_in |
Free speech on the internet
|
| gptkbp:judges |
Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, Sotomayor
|
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
Constitutionality of state laws
Judicial scrutiny of state laws Constitutional rights in the digital age Justices Thomas, Alito, Roberts |
| gptkbp:legal_context |
Sex offender registration laws
Post-9/11 legal landscape |
| gptkbp:legal_framework |
Reinforced First Amendment protections
Struck down as overly broad First Amendment jurisprudence Influenced state legislation on internet access for offenders Influenced future legislation on internet use for offenders Part of broader discussion on digital rights |
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
First Amendment rights
Ongoing discussions about online regulation State's interest in protecting children Debate over public safety vs. free speech Overbroad law restricting access to social media |
| gptkbp:legal_outcome |
Reinforced digital free speech rights
Reinforced protections for free speech online Struck down law restricting access to social media Expanded rights for sex offenders regarding online access |
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
gptkb:American_Civil_Liberties_Union
Examined implications for First Amendment rights |
| gptkbp:legislation |
Sex offender registration laws
|
| gptkbp:outcome |
North Carolina law struck down
Law struck down |
| gptkbp:precedent |
Established limits on state regulation
Future cases on digital rights Social media restrictions Influenced future cases regarding online speech Set precedent for online speech rights Social media access for sex offenders |
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Justice_Anthony_Kennedy
|
| gptkbp:public_reaction |
Mixed reactions
Mixed reactions from advocacy groups |
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:Doe_v._Snyder
gptkb:United_States_v._Stevens gptkb:United_States_v._Packingham |
| gptkbp:related_to |
First Amendment jurisprudence
|
| gptkbp:responds_to |
gptkb:State_of_North_Carolina
|
| gptkbp:scholarly_analysis |
Analyzed in legal journals
|
| gptkbp:signatories |
gptkb:Lester_Packingham
|
| gptkbp:significance |
Strengthened First Amendment protections
Impact on social media restrictions for sex offenders Impact on sex offender laws |
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
3
|