NARSOL Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging West Virginia’s $125 Annual Registry Fee
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:
[email protected]
Charleston, WV – October 15, 2025 – The National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws (NARSOL) has filed a federal lawsuit in the Southern District of West Virginia challenging a new state law that imposes a $125 annual fee on individuals required to register as sex offenders.
The class action lawsuit Kaso, et al. v Mitchell, filed on behalf of West Virginia’s 6,450 registrants, argues that the fee—set to take effect January 1, 2026—creates an unconstitutional, punitive fine rather than a legitimate administrative cost.
Under this law, registrants must pay $125 annually or face property liens, regardless of their ability to pay. The state expects the fee to generate over $800,000 per year.
“The statute enacted imposes a fee that does not go towards any registration function, and we contend that is a fine,” stated NARSOL’s staff attorney Larry King, who filed the complaint jointly with a West Virginia attorney.
According to the complaint, none of the collected fees are earmarked for sex offender registration functions. Instead, the funds will:
- first support mental health counselors, seminars, and training for current and former West Virginia State Police employees—whether or not they work with the registry; and
- then fund any other expenses “essential to the general operations of the State Police.”
The complaint emphasizes that no fees will be used for “sex offender notification, registration, verification, or compliance.”
The lawsuit alleges that the annual fee violates:
The Eighth Amendment – by imposing a punitive fine, often for life, that serves no registration purpose;
The Fourteenth Amendment – by requiring payment regardless of ability to pay, violating due process and equal protection.
The class action suit, represented by three West Virginia registrants, is partially funded by WVRSOL, NARSOL’s West Virginia state affiliate. The complaint requests that the Court:
- issue a declaratory judgment declaring the law unconstitutional both on its face and as applied;
- grant an injunction prohibiting enforcement of W. Va. Code Ann. § 15-12-2(o).
The National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws (NARSOL) is a civil rights organization dedicated to promoting evidence-based policies and constitutional protections for individuals affected by sex offense laws.
They will provide updates as the case progresses.
Note to editors: Court documents and supporting materials available upon request.
“Under this law, registrants must pay $125 annually or face property liens”
Isn’t that extortion, coercion and blackmail?
The brazen arrogance of them wanting to put a lien against your house for non-payment is absolutely insane. Especially after you already PAY your yearly property tax bill that INCLUDES an itemized earmark for “General fund Sheriff.” My house was reassessed this year and my taxes DOUBLED what they were in 2024.
I was already paying $158.00 towards General LEO operations (via property taxes), but this year it exploded to $318.34 !! Now on top of THAT, they expect us to pay a yearly registry fee also?
Sorry, but that is DOUBLE-DIPPING!
Oh, and it’s also arrogant that these funds/fee will go towards officer mental health care while these laws destory ours.
It’s very unconstitutional. It’s called “Debtor’s prison”
I find it unfortunate that the complaint refers to the registry as a “non-punitive civil regulatory scheme.” Maybe I’m paranoid, but I think lines like that in cases like this may come back in future litigation. After all, how can an organization complain that the registry is punitive after having recognized and argued it as not in previous complaints?
In the future, stating something like “a PURPORTEDLY non-punitive regulatory scheme” with a footnote that whether or not the registry is punitive is not part of the instant complaint would probably be better.
Adding “purportedly” or “allegedly” is fine, but advocates do need to use the term every chance they get in order to show the contrast between that and the punishment it wreaks upon people who are required to register. Legally, it is not purported or alleged. One of the best chances we have of rolling back the registry is proving that it does indeed punish, and a civil, regulatory initiative cannot punish; it is civil, not criminal, and if punishment is proven, then it becomes criminal–which a civil initiative is not allowed to do.