Burns v. Lackey

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a statute’s requirement that an offender report Internet identifiers in person within three business days “imposes a substantially greater, and apparently unnecessary, burden on protected First Amendment speech”
• concluding in-person, three-business-day reporting requirement “imposes a 14 No. 2018AP2074-CR substantially greater, and apparently unnecessary, burden on protected First Amendment speech”
• ruling on a similar Michigan statute that plaintiffs argued was ambiguous on “whether the 1,000 feet distance should be measured ‘point to point’ or ‘property| Jline to property line’ Jor whether it should be measured ‘as the crow flies or as people actually travel.”
• the word “regularly” both fails to provide fair notice of the conduct proscribed and is imprecise enough to invite arbitrary enforcement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).