Free Speech

unconstitutionally compels speech, says the Eighth Circuit federal court of appeals.

Eugene Volokh | 1.2.2026 6:35 PM

Sanderson v. Hanaway, decided today by Eighth Circuit Judge Jane Kelly, joined by Judges James Loken and Ralph Erickson, struck down part of a Missouri law that provides,

Any person required to register as a sexual offender … shall be required on October thirty-first of each year to:

From the court's opinion:

The First Amendment's protection "includes both the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all." … The sign mandate … explicitly requires registrants to post a sign bearing a specific message…. [T]he sign mandate compels speech and, thus, is unconstitutional unless it can survive strict scrutiny….

The sign mandate will survive strict scrutiny only if it "furthers a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest." The district court found that "Defendants have established a compelling interest in restricting certain conduct of sexual offenders on Halloween that satisfies the strict scrutiny standard." Neither party challenges that determination on appeal, and understandably so. We therefore move directly to the question of whether the statutory provision is narrowly tailored. In........

© Reason.com