NARSOL files constitutional case in Arizona
On January 27, 2026, NARSOL, in collaboration with AZRSOL, filed a federal lawsuit in Arizona challenging the constitutionality of the Internet restrictions imposed by the Maricopa County Adult Probation Department on individuals convicted of sex offenses. Titled Kenneth Soule et al. v. Michael Cimino, in his official capacity as Chief Probation Officer of the Maricopa County Adult Probation
Department, Case No. 26-cv-00560, the case has four named Plaintiffs, all of whom are under the custody of Maricopa County Adult Probation Department and seek greater Internet access while on probation. Plaintiffs seek to have the case certified as a class action.
Plaintiffs claim that the current policy and practices of the Maricopa County Adult Probation Department unreasonably restrict Plaintiffs’ access to the Internet in violation the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. In particular, Plaintiffs allege that the Department’s policies violate the First Amendment because the restrictions imposed are “overly broad” in that they “impose categorical restrictions on Internet access for individuals on probation for sex offenses, regardless of offense conduct, supervision progress, or individualized risk assessment.” Plaintiffs’ Complaint at ¶ 71. Plaintiffs allege the Department’s policies violate the Fourteenth Amendment because the Department imposed its Internet restrictions “without individualized findings, written justifications, or any standardized review mechanism.” Id. at ¶ 81.
NARSOL-affiliated attorneys Mark Weinberg and Adele Nicholas have brought the case, along with local Arizona counsel Samantha K. DuMond of the Dumond Law Firm in Phoenix Arizona.
If it were me, I would point out and support that online predation is nowhere near as prevalent as portrayed. NCMEC estimates based on nothing more than seeking more donations is hardly proof of the contrary.
Even if it were, a far more effective policy would be to restrict minors’ from internet access. Minors are already barred from many places (bars, gyms, etc.) – internet access could be restricted in the same manner. Or require parents to lock access at home and only allow it when they (the parents) are present.
thank you Narsol for your work.
Barring the individual from the internet blocks them from access to health care, education, financial matters, childrens school records, the ability to apply for a job, and literally all of lifes basic function. But perhaps that’s the idea – to eliminate all potential for all rehabilitation and enable death by a thousand nicks.