SCOTUS won’t weigh in regarding defacement of Louisiana “sex offender” ID

By Ken Stickney . . . The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review a Louisiana case that involved a man who defaced his state-issued identification badge by removing the designation “sex offender” from it.

A petition to the high court from the Louisiana solicitor general for a writ of certiorari was denied, according to the court’s order list revealed Monday.

The case involved Tazin A. Hill, who pleaded guilty in 2010 to the charge of having sex with an underage girl — she was 14, he was 32. Hill formerly had an address in Duson.

Hill served prison time for the crime and after he was released was required to carry a state-issued ID bearing the words “Sex Offender” printed in orange. Such explicit identification was mandated by a 2006 law.

When Hill reported to the Lafayette Sheriff’s to update the badge in 2016, it was discovered that he had defaced the ID by removing the words “Sex Offender.”

Penalties for defacing the card could have ranged from two to 10 years in prison with a fine of up to $1,000. The case of defacing the card was taken in 2019 before 15th Judicial District Judge Patrick Michot Sr., now retired, who ruled in Hill’s favor that the state should have taken less restrictive ways than those taken on the ID badge to notify law enforcement officers that Hill had previously committed a sex offense.

Read the remainder of the article here at the Acadiana Advocate.

someone outside of NARSOL

Written by 

Occasionally we will share articles that have been published elsewhere. This is a common practice as long as only a portion of the piece is shared; a full piece is very occasionally shared with permission. In either case, the author's name and the place of original publication are displayed prominently and with links.

4 Thoughts to “SCOTUS won’t weigh in regarding defacement of Louisiana “sex offender” ID”

  1. AvatarTravis Hardy

    So, Is this a step in a possible case for removing this “stamp” on US Passports then?

    1. AvatarSasha

      I hope so. I still do not understand why such a horrible way to identify someone and the State is fine with it. Instead of the State conceding, it must continue to force someone to wear a burden.
      I am also taken back by the penalties imposed on defacing such ID.
      I wonder if they would impose such ID on the vaccinated or unvaced. How about other post incarcerated or other for failing to pay back taxes, etc..
      One can only hope this means a change, however, the State will continue to push things to the limit.

    2. AvatarTim in WI

      It is very important to make a clear distillation between STATE POWER vs FEDERAL POWER, the latter being the greater entity with the ability to superimpose upon the whole so long as there is a vote by each congress of the states to make it so. Do not confuse the two sovereigns, nor their similar but different structures as applied to the individual citizen. While we discuss law we completely rely upon administrative interpretation of INTENT based on words as interpreted by courts. In effect SCOTUS as it exists today is the gatekeeper to defining the gov limit. By not jumping in ( granting cert.) SCOTUS ultimately agrees ( albeit quietly) with what was determined by the last court ( simply applied sound process and precedents) was correct. In this case here about state IDs, which is completely a State’s concern, the Supreme Court of the US has rejected getting in the fight primarily because it completely up to individual states to determine the information put on state IDs. Passports are Federal IDs and so some offenders have two forms of personal IDs with the marks denoting criminal behavior.

      the problem is with the database use

  2. AvatarPloter

    Lol when I read the reasons for having the stamp I nearly laughed to death. Someone might want to check your ID if the come by your house to trick or treat? Wtfffff? Someone might want to ask a random person for their ID to see if they are a sex offender if the power goes out? Whatttt? They know very well this is just another form of their evil way of punishing people well beyond their time served. What do people use ID for? Getting credit, getting housing, getting jobs, getting any type of help. What a bunch of scumbags, why can’t they just let people love their dam lives after they done their time? What is it with these people and their need to spread hate? What does it get them?

Comments are closed.