REASONABLE RULING AGAINST UNREASONABLE RULES

The California Supreme Court ruled that San Diego County’s blanket ban on where sex offenders can live is unconstitutional

San Diego County prohibits sex offenders from living within 2000 feet of a school or park where children gather. That makes it practically impossible for convicted sex offenders to reside anywhere within San Diego County.

On Monday, in a unanimous ruling, the California Supreme Court banned the blanket residence ban San Diego County imposed on convicted sex offenders. The seven justices held that those residence restrictions were likely to make sex offenders homeless and interfered with the supervision of sex offender parolees. Thus the court declared that the county’s residence ban was unconstitutional.

Justice Marvin Baxter wrote:

“Blanket enforcement of the residency restrictions against these parolees has severely restricted their ability to find housing. The rules have increased the incidence of homelessness among them, and hindered their access to medical treatment, drug and alcohol dependency services, psychological counseling and other rehabilitative social services available to all parolees.”

While this ruling applies only to San Diego County, it opens the door for sex offenders in other California counties to challenge similar residence restrictions.

I have long opposed residence restrictions that made it impossible for a sex offender to live with his wife and children, with his adult children, with his brother or cousin. Those ordinances are merely feel-good laws that really do not protect children from sexual predators. Monday's decision was a reasonable ruling against unreasonable rules.