The Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled the state’s sexting law unconstitutional on Monday, stating that the law was too broad and could have unintended consequences.
The law against sexting stated that “any person 18 years of age or older who uses the internet or electronic device to intentionally arouse the sexual desire of a child or any person is guilty of a felony.” While the measure sounds like it is rooted in good intentions, the state Supreme Court took issue with the verbiage “or any person.” The Appeals Court found it troubling that the language risked banning protected speech between adults who have the right to receive and send such communications.
Too Broad a Definition
That’s not to say you can go around sending sexually explicit photos to everyone in your contacts, but the Minnesota Supreme Court shot down the law to protect other instances that could technically fall under the law. For example, under the old law, if you sent a snapchat of a brothel scene from Game of Thrones to a co-worker, you could end up facing felony charges.
“This ruling doesn’t affect if an adult solicits a minor on the internet or through texting to meet at a hotel for a sexual encounter,” said defense attorney John Westrick, who was tasked with defending his client against felony sexting charges. His client, a Dakota County middle school lunch lady, had shared some electronic communications with a student that were sexual in nature. During the case it became clear that the lunch lady had no plans to pursue a physical relationship with the minor, and the felony charge was thrown out. Westrick said it was clear the lunch lady was not “grooming” the boy for sex, which the original sexting law aimed to prevent.
“I understand their desire to protect the children, I really do. But prosecutors need to show intent to commit a crime. It doesn’t fly in this case,” Westrick said after the felony sexting charge as dismissed against his client.
The Minnesota Supreme Court said the goal of the old law was admirable in that it was meant to protect the interests of children and minors, but the statute ultimately went beyond legitimate interest, leaving it susceptible to abuse.
