Following our victory against Montana forcing sex offender registration on people who had been convicted of having oral or anal sex, today a federal judge in Idaho enjoined the state from forcing sex offender registration on two plaintiffs who were convicted of having oral or anal sex before the Supreme Court said such convictions were unconstitutional. Press release to come, but for now, here is the order.
UPDATE - Here’s our press release:
Federal Court Rules Against Idaho in Lawsuit Over Sex Offender Registration for Oral, Anal Sex
Decision Blocks Idaho’s enforcement of its “Crimes Against Nature” statute through the state’s sex offender registry
BOISE – On Saturday, September 4, 2021, the federal district court for Idaho ruled that plaintiffs in Doe v. Wasden, a lawsuit challenging Idaho’s enforcement of its archaic “Crime against Nature” statute, cannot be required to register as sex offenders while the lawsuit proceeds.
The ruling, issued by federal Judge B. Lynn Winmill, highlighted the “discriminatory and arbitrary enforcement of the Idaho crime against nature statute,” which the judge found “has been used to target, condemn, and punish consensual homosexual activity” in the state.
“I’m grateful to the court for putting an end to my nightmare,” said Randall Menges. “I wish it didn’t take a lawsuit to enforce what the Supreme Court commanded 18 years ago, but I’m happy that the Court took this action. I look forward to winning this case.”
“It is hard to believe that in 2021, Idaho would still put people convicted of having oral or anal sex on the sex offender registry,” said Matthew Strugar, an attorney representing the plaintiffs. “This kind of overt, state-sanctioned homophobia would have been surprising 30 years ago. Today it is shocking.”
“The decision by the Court is the first step in righting a wrong that has persisted in Idaho for many years,” said Debra Groberg, an attorney at Nevin Benjamin & McKay LLP, the law firm that was initially contacted about challenging this registration requirement in Idaho. Ms. Groberg added: “What is frequently forgotten in situations such as this is the terrible harm that individuals like our clients endure when laws that have no business being laws are blindly enforced. The real heroes here are our clients who had the courage to stand up and challenge these laws.”
“We hope our clients can soon move on with their lives, lives that have been irreparably harmed by the State’s illegitimate infringement on their fundamental rights and liberty.” said Aadika Singh, legal director for the ACLU of Idaho.
Doe v. Wasden was filed in September of 2020 by the ACLU of Idaho, the Law Office of Matthew Strugar, and Boise law firm Nevin, Benjamin & McKay, LLP. Two men, Randy Menges and an Idahoan known as “John Doe” in the case, sued Idaho officials requiring them to register as sex offenders for having oral and anal sex more than 20 years ago. The court’s order prohibits Idaho from making Menges or Doe register on Idaho’s sex offender registry.
In 2003, the United States Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Lawrence v. Texas held that anti-sodomy laws, including Idaho’s Crime Against Nature statute, violate constitutional protections under the Fourteenth Amendment. Yet Idaho is one of three states that continues to enforce its anti-sodomy Crime Against Nature law by requiring people with convictions to register as sex offenders. From 1955 to 1957, Idaho’s Crime Against Nature statute was the primary legal tool for the “The Boys of Boise” affair—one of the most virulent anti-gay witch hunts in American history. Idaho’s Crimes Against Nature Statute remains virtually unchanged since its inception in Idaho’s territorial days.
More information: https://www.acluidaho.org/en/cases/doe-v-wasden