NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WTVF) — A three-judge appellate court panel ruled this week that just because some people faced new restrictions for convictions before Tennessee's sex offender registry existed, it doesn’t mean the registry is unconstitutional.
The Sixth Circuit ruling sent shockwaves throughout Nashville with attorneys scrambling to better understand how this will impact their clients.
Back in 2023, district courts agreed with several John Does who filed a lawsuit claiming Tennessee’s sex offender registry as it stands, violated their constitutional rights.
I follow up on this topic in the player above.
They argued they shouldn’t have to follow restrictions from an ever-changing registry that was completely revamped in 2004 — long after their convictions from more than a decade earlier.
It’s the same argument, Nashville attorney Kyle Mothershead told NewsChannel 5 Investigates that he used last year to remove his client Thomas and many others from the registry.
“This was not the law when you committed the offense, then they made it up after the fact and that’s against the constitution. That is unconstitutional and they’ve all worked so far,” Mothershead said.
By then, U.S. District Judge Aleta Trauger agreed to grant a sweeping injunction effectively removing several names from the registry, but the appeals court panel now says just because some restrictions may appear unconstitutional, that doesn’t mean the system is unconstitutional.
Although the panel found similarities with Michigan’s sex offender registry that was eventually struck down, appellate judges ruled that district courts should review each case against the restrictions they’ve challenged before ruling on whether someone’s constitutional rights were violated.
“I might not have been physically locked up in prison, but mentally out here, I was still in prison because they had control of my life,” Thomas said.
Thomas accepted a plea deal in 1996 for raping a family friend who died years later. Thomas however, maintains his innocence over the conviction, but said he hoped to avoid a much longer sentence.
He was sentenced to the Lifelines treatment program, but then violated his parole and was sent to prison. Thomas was released in 2003, and completed his parole, but remained on the sex offender registry.
Tennessee lawmakers would replace the registry the next year with one that now restricted Thomas from working or living within 1,000 feet of a school, playground or anywhere you could reasonably expect to see children.
“I have grandkids man and I can’t walk up and down with them? I’m talking about, I’m a grandparent and I can’t be with my grandkids,” Thomas said.
Thomas was also now classified as a “violent sex offender,” which meant paying an annual fine, checking in with law enforcement four times a year, and remaining on the registry for life.
That all changed last year.
“I’m talking about, when this came off me, it made me feel human again,” Thomas said.
Of those cases, at least 34 people had convinced a judge to remove their names from the registry either temporarily or for good.
Thomas has since re-married and now lives a quiet life with family after being removed from the registry.
Meanwhile, it’s not clear if this appellate court decision will impact cases where people were removed from the registry or if this makes it tougher to remove names in the future.
One thing is certain, attorneys say this is just be the beginning.
The three-judge panel ruled that although these lawsuits were filed against Gov. Bill Lee and TBI director David Rausch. Lee does not enforce these laws, so his name will be removed.
Attorneys tell NewsChannel 5 Investigates that the case with these eight John Does still has multiple layers of review before the panel opinion is considered the final word.
One or both sides could request an “en banc” review from the Sixth Circuit judges and not just the three-judge panel. The next step would be to request a review from the Supreme Court of the United States.
