https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2019/04/05/iowa-supreme-court-sex-offenders-required-report-social-media-accounts-internet-first-amendment/3379359002/

The Iowa Supreme Court ruled Friday that requiring sex offenders to disclose their social media identities and other digital information does not violate their free speech rights.

Five of the seven justices agreed that the requirement, part of the state's sex offender registry, was put in place a decade ago to protect children and victims from possible abuse but was not a "proxy for content regulations." Justice Thomas Waterman's opinion emphasized that sex offenders aren't required to disclose their passwords and aren't prevented from participating in social media. 

Lloyd Aschbrenner, a registered sex offender, challenged the requirement. In 2007, Aschbrenner, then 37, pleaded guilty to "lascivious acts" after molesting his 13-year-old stepdaughter. This landed him a five-year suspended prison sentence and required him to register as a sex offender, which, at the time, meant he only had to provide the local sheriff his name, address and phone number.

The Iowa Judicial Branch building, which houses the Iowa Supreme Court (Photo: William Petroski/Des Moines Register)

Ten years later Aschbrenner was charged with failing to provide a sheriff's office his Facebook name. He challenged his conviction, saying the rules infringed on his First Amendment rights and, in any case, didn't apply to him because he was ordered to register as a sex offender before the internet-disclosure requirements were passed by the Legislature.

Waterman rejected those assertions.

"The law is intended to prevent or detect a sex offender’s use of internet communications to lure new victims," the court's decision read, saying that the registry requirements are not punitive, but rather a tool to protect the "the health and safety of individuals, and particularly children, from individuals who, by virtue of probation, parole, or other release, have been given access to members of the public.”

"Just as disclosure of a sex offender’s street address alerts neighbors with children who might interact with the offender, the disclosure of the names an offender uses on social media helps protect the public from the risks of anonymous postings or electronic communications trolling for victims," the ruling said. 

The requirements can apply to Aschbrenner retroactively because they are not intended to punish him for the crime, Waterman wrote. 

Justice David Wiggins, in a dissent joined by Justice Brent Appel, said that because the Iowa Supreme Court held last year that the sex offender registry as applied to juvenile offenders qualifies as punitive, adult offenders should have the same protection from retroactive requirements.

In the 2018 case, the court ruled that placing a juvenile on the list was punitive, but not "cruel and unusual punishment." 

More: Registry requirements questioned for young sex offenders

The requirements of the sex offender registry have been the subject of high-profile court challenges before. The Iowa Supreme Court decided in 2005 that its residency restrictions were constitutional. The court in that case said that requiring offenders to live at least 2,000 feet — or about four blocks — from schools and child care providers was not punishment, but rather a way to protect the public.