On Friday, January 19, 2024, NARSOL filed a federal lawsuit in Illinois challenging the constitutionality of a parole restriction that prohibits individuals with convictions for sexual offenses from using erectile dysfunction medication. The two plaintiffs in the case are NARSOL on behalf of its Illinois members and Jason Ridley, an individual on mandatory supervised release in Illinois who seeks to use ED medications to counter the common side effects caused by prostate cancer surgery. Mr. Ridley is also a member of NARSOL. Plaintiffs’ attorneys are Mark Weinberg and Adele Nicholas. The case is The National Association for Rational Sex Offense Laws et al. v. Hughes, #24-cv-50025 (Northern District of Illinois). Plaintiffs seek to certify the case as a class
action.

Plaintiffs allege that the challenged statute (e.g., 730 ILCS 5/3-3-7(a)(7.10))
interferes with fundamental liberty interests—namely, intimate aspects of
sexuality and private medical decisions—and as such violates the Eighth and
Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. The significance of
the lawsuit goes beyond the substantive legal claims at issue.  This is so
because, under current law in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, individuals
cannot challenge statutory parole restrictions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 but can
only challenge them via a petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Habeas corpus petitions are often an inadequate remedy when a parole
condition violates constitutional rights because, before bringing a habeas
petition, the plaintiff must first exhaust state court remedies, which can take
years. Moreover, a plaintiff in a habeas case cannot bring a class action
lawsuit and cannot recover attorneys’ fees from the state. The federal courts
of appeals are split on the issue, and Plaintiffs seek to have the Seventh
Circuit come in line with the other circuits that allow such challenges under 42
U.S.C. § 1983.

The post New NARSOL suit filed in Illinois first appeared on NARSOL.