A Stitch in Haste

Richmond, Virginia, realizes that red-lining need not be just for child molesters:

With several exceptions, the proposal for Target Enforcement Zones ... would make it a crime for a previously arrested prostitute or "john" to even be seen within those neighborhoods.

At the request of prosecutors, a judge will have the discretion to bar someone with a previous arrest from entering the zones unless they live, worship or work in the neighborhood.

"This allows us to identify an individual to the court and say, 'You can't be in this area,'" said Richmond police Maj. David McCoy.

Keep in mind that this is no longer about "kids" or "schools." This is exile for the sake of exile; vindictiveness for the sake of vindictiveness.

Of course, "freedom of travel" is one of those pesky "fundamental rights" that Americans enjoy, such that laws curtailing it are subject to strict scrutiny under the Fourteenth Amendment. See, e.g., U.S. v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966) ("a right so elementary was conceived from the beginning to be a necessary concomitant of the stronger Union the Constitution created").

This means that the banishment program (hat tip to 3rd District Councilman Chris A. Hilbert for being sufficiently bold, or stupid, to actually use the word "banishment") must be "necessary" to achieve a "compelling" state interest. Curbing prostitution is (to non-libertarians, anyway) apparently a "legitimate" government interest, but it is hardly a "compelling" interest. So too with keeping prostitution away from schools: important, perhaps, but not compelling in the way that, say, national security is compelling. And one way or the other, exile is not by any stretch of the imagination a "necessary" means to achieve that interest — more police would be an alternative, or so one might think.

Bottom line: A mean law to pander to mean people. Oh, and unconstitutional too. Funny how those two tend to go together.

As I have warned regarding the sex offender mania: There is no reason to expect it to stay contained to violent sex offenders or child molesters. It's too tempting for politicians not to extend it.

(Via CrimLaw.)