{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-25","fingerprint":"ewai:us:f678ac","proof":"sha256:840cda5f5754650a857b042873290ed9df0aae5697918acb21eabbb3d390cca9","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"us:ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25","para_26","para_27","para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33","para_34","para_35","para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63","para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70","para_71","para_72","para_73","para_74","para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78","para_79","para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87","para_88","para_89","para_90","para_91","para_92","para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101","para_102","para_103","para_104","para_105","para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110","para_111","para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117","para_118","para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122","para_123","para_124","para_125","para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129","para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141","para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145","para_146","para_147","para_148","para_149","para_150","para_151","para_152","para_153","para_154","para_155","para_156","para_157","para_158","para_159","para_160","para_161","para_162","para_163","para_164","para_165","para_166","para_167","para_168","para_169","para_170","para_171","para_172","para_173","para_174","para_175","para_176","para_177","para_178","para_179","para_180","para_181","para_182","para_183","para_184","para_185","para_186","para_187","para_188","para_189","para_190","para_191","para_192","para_193","para_194","para_195","para_196","para_197","para_198","para_199","para_200","para_201","para_202","para_203","para_204","para_205","para_206","para_207","para_208","para_209","para_210","para_211","para_212","para_213","para_214","para_215","para_216","para_217","para_218","para_219","para_220","para_221","para_222","para_223","para_224","para_225","para_226","para_227","para_228","para_229","para_230","para_231","para_232","para_233","para_234","para_235","para_236","para_237","para_238","para_239","para_240","para_241","para_242","para_243","para_244","para_245","para_246","para_247","para_248","para_249","para_250","para_251","para_252","para_253","para_254","para_255","para_256","para_257","para_258","para_259","para_260","para_261","para_262","para_263","para_264","para_265","para_266","para_267","para_268","para_269","para_270","para_271","para_272","para_273","para_274","para_275","para_276","para_277","para_278","para_279","para_280","para_281","para_282","para_283","para_284","para_285","para_286","para_287","para_288","para_289","para_290","para_291","para_292","para_293","para_294","para_295","para_296","para_297","para_298","para_299","para_300","para_301","para_302","para_303","para_304","para_305","para_306","para_307","para_308","para_309","para_310","para_311","para_312","para_313","para_314","para_315","para_316","para_317","para_318","para_319","para_320","para_321","para_322","para_323","para_324","para_325","para_326","para_327","para_328","para_329","para_330","para_331","para_332","para_333","para_334","para_335","para_336","para_337","para_338","para_339","para_340","para_341","para_342","para_343","para_344","para_345","para_346","para_347","para_348","para_349","para_350","para_351","para_352","para_353","para_354","para_355","para_356","para_357","para_358","para_359","para_360","para_361","para_362","para_363","para_364","para_365","para_366","para_367","para_368","para_369","para_370","para_371","para_372","para_373","para_374","para_375","para_376","para_377","para_378","para_379","para_380","para_381","para_382","para_383","para_384","para_385","para_386","para_387","para_388","para_389","para_390","para_391","para_392","para_393","para_394","para_395","para_396","para_397","para_398","para_399","para_400","para_401","para_402","para_403","para_404","para_405","para_406","para_407","para_408","para_409","para_410","para_411","para_412","para_413","para_414","para_415","para_416","para_417","para_418","para_419","para_420","para_421","para_422","para_423","para_424","para_425","para_426","para_427","para_428","para_429","para_430","para_431","para_432","para_433","para_434","para_435","para_436","para_437","para_438","para_439","para_440","para_441","para_442","para_443","para_444","para_445","para_446","para_447","para_448","para_449","para_450","para_451","para_452","para_453","para_454","para_455","para_456","para_457","para_458","para_459","para_460","para_461","para_462","para_463","para_464","para_465","para_466","para_467","para_468","para_469","para_470","para_471","para_472","para_473","para_474","para_475","para_476","para_477","para_478","para_479","para_480","para_481","para_482","para_483","para_484","para_485","para_486","para_487","para_488","para_489","para_490","para_491","para_492","para_493","para_494","para_495","para_496","para_497","para_498","para_499","para_500","para_501","para_502","para_503","para_504","para_505","para_506","para_507","para_508","para_509","para_510","para_511","para_512","para_513","para_514","para_515","para_516","para_517","para_518","para_519","para_520","para_521","para_522","para_523","para_524","para_525","para_526","para_527","para_528","para_529","para_530","para_531","para_532","para_533","para_534","para_535","para_536","para_537","para_538","para_539","para_540","para_541","para_542","para_543","para_544","para_545","para_546","para_547","para_548","para_549","para_550","para_551","para_552","para_553","para_554","para_555","para_556","para_557","para_558","para_559","para_560","para_561","para_562","para_563","para_564","para_565","para_566","para_567","para_568","para_569","para_570","para_571","para_572","para_573","para_574","para_575","para_576","para_577","para_578","para_579","para_580","para_581","para_582","para_583","para_584","para_585","para_586","para_587","para_588","para_589","para_590","para_591","para_592","para_593","para_594","para_595","para_596","para_597","para_598","para_599","para_600","para_601","para_602","para_603","para_604","para_605","para_606","para_607","para_608","para_609","para_610","para_611","para_612","para_613","para_614","para_615","para_616","para_617","para_618","para_619","para_620","para_621","para_622","para_623","para_624","para_625","para_626","para_627","para_628","para_629","para_630","para_631","para_632","para_633","para_634","para_635","para_636","para_637","para_638","para_639","para_640","para_641","para_642","para_643","para_644","para_645","para_646","para_647","para_648","para_649","para_650","para_651","para_652","para_653","para_654","para_655","para_656","para_657","para_658","para_659","para_660","para_661","para_662","para_663","para_664","para_665","para_666","para_667","para_668","para_669","para_670","para_671","para_672","para_673","para_674","para_675","para_676","para_677","para_678","para_679","para_680","para_681","para_682","para_683","para_684","para_685","para_686","para_687","para_688","para_689","para_690","para_691","para_692","para_693","para_694","para_695","para_696","para_697","para_698","para_699","para_700","para_701","para_702","para_703","para_704","para_705","para_706","para_707","para_708","para_709","para_710","para_711","para_712","para_713","para_714","para_715","para_716","para_717","para_718","para_719","para_720","para_721","para_722","para_723","para_724","para_725","para_726","para_727","para_728","para_729","para_730","para_731","para_732","para_733","para_734","para_735","para_736","para_737","para_738","para_739","para_740","para_741","para_742","para_743","para_744","para_745","para_746","para_747","para_748","para_749","para_750","para_751","para_752","para_753","para_754","para_755","para_756","para_757","para_758","para_759","para_760","para_761","para_762","para_763","para_764","para_765","para_766","para_767","para_768","para_769","para_770","para_771","para_772","para_773","para_774","para_775","para_776","para_777","para_778","para_779","para_780","para_781","para_782","para_783","para_784","para_785","para_786","para_787","para_788","para_789","para_790","para_791","para_792","para_793","para_794","para_795","para_796","para_797","para_798","para_799","para_800","para_801","para_802","para_803","para_804","para_805","para_806","para_807","para_808","para_809","para_810","para_811","para_812","para_813","para_814","para_815","para_816"],"kind":"front_matter"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"FOR PUBLICATION","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"In the","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"United States Court of Appeals","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"For the Eleventh Circuit","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"No. 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"BRUCE HENRY,","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"Plaintiff-Appellee,","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"versus","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"SHERIFF OF TUSCALOOSA COUNTY, ALABAMA,","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"in his official capacity,","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF TUSCALOOSA COUNTY,","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"ALABAMA,","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"in his official capacity,","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA,","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"in his official capacity,","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"Defendants-Appellants.","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"Appeal from the United States District Court","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"for the Middle District of Alabama","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"D.C. Docket No. 2:21-cv-00797-RAH-JTA","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"____________________","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 1 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"2 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"Before ROSENBAUM, ABUDU, and WILSON, Circuit Judges.","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judge:","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"Alabama enacted the Alabama Sex Offender Registration","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"and Community Notification Act (“Act”) in 2011. ALA. CODE § 15-","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"20A-11. Under it, no sex offender may, among other things, “reside","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"or conduct an overnight visit with a minor,” even if they are the","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"minor’s parent, if “[t]he adult sex offender has been convicted of","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"any sex offense involving a child, regardless of whether the adult","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"sex offender was related to or shared a residence with the child vic-","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"tim.” Id. § 15-20A-11(d)(4). This ban applies for the life of the par-","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"ent and prevents them from living with their current and future","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"children. Alabama offers no escape hatch from the Act for a person","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"who falls within its confines.","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"So it prevents Plaintiff Bruce Henry, who was convicted of","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"possessing images of child pornography and has since served his","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"sentence and had a child with his wife, from living with his son.","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"Henry challenged the Act as a violation of his fundamental right to","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"live with his children. Alabama argued that, as a convicted sex of-","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"fender, Henry had no such right.","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"As an en banc Court, we determined that Henry, like all par-","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"ents, enjoys a fundamental right to live with his children. That","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"does not mean that Alabama can’t regulate or even abrogate that","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"right. But to do so, the Act must survive strict scrutiny. That is,","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"Alabama must show that its legislation is narrowly tailored to fur-","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"ther its compelling interest in the safety of children. The en banc","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 2 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 3","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"Court remanded this case to us to determine whether the Act is","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"narrowly tailored and survives strict scrutiny.","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"After careful consideration, we conclude that it does not. So","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"we hold the Act to be unconstitutional as applied to Henry.","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"I. BACKGROUND1","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"We summarize the background of this appeal in three parts.","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"First, we discuss Henry’s background. Second, we explain the as-","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"pects of the Act that govern this appeal and permanently prevent","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"Henry from living with his son. And third, we review the proce-","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"dural history of this case.","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"A. Henry’s Background","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"In 2013, Bruce Henry pled guilty to “knowingly possess[ing]","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":". . . any book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, computer disk,","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"or any other material that contains an image of child pornogra-","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"phy.” 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B). When officers arrested him,","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"Henry had two videos and 348 photos of prepubescent and adoles-","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"cent girls, all of which he had downloaded from the internet. Be-","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"fore his arrest, Henry had no history of sexual offenses.","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"The district court sentenced Henry to 70 months in prison","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"and 60 months of supervised release with special conditions. He","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"served five years of his sentence before his release in March 2018.","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"1 We take much of the background directly from our en banc opinion because","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"not much has changed since we issued it. In the interest of convenience, we","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"reprint the background here, with only a few updates.","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 3 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"4 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"After release, Henry completed a qualified Sex Offender Treatment","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"Program, as well as individual and group counseling. Henry con-","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"tinues to attend weekly Sex Addicts Anonymous meetings. He also","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"maintains a steady job, attends church, and volunteers.","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"We note two special conditions of Henry’s supervised re-","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"lease. First, Henry must participate in the United States Probation","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"Office’s computer restriction-and-monitoring program. That pro-","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"gram prohibits Henry from possessing or using certain electronic","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"devices that may communicate with other electronic devices with-","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"out the Probation Office’s prior approval. And second, Henry may","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"not have “any unsupervised, one-to-one contact with any children","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"under the age of 18 other than his own children.”","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"Despite these restrictions, while on supervised release,","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"Henry in two instances accessed pornography. In July 2019, Henry","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"admitted during a polygraphed interview that he used an Amazon","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"Firestick to view pornography. A forensic examination revealed no","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"saved images, but Henry had viewed images with “titles indicating","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"that they were of young or teenage females.” And Henry admitted","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"in a follow-up polygraph test that he actively sought out images of","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"teen girls and children posed in sexual positions.","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"Also, in December 2019, Henry used his wife’s unlocked","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"phone to search for pornographic images. He disclosed the inci-","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"dent to his sexual-offender-treatment provider but failed to inform","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"his probation officer during the officer’s home visit in January 2020.","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"Instead, the probation officer learned about the incident from","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"Henry’s supervision report for that month.","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 4 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 5","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"Citing these violations, Henry’s probation officer filed a pe-","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"tition to revoke Henry’s supervised release. A federal district court","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"declined. Instead, the court extended Henry’s term of supervised","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"release from 60 to 96 months (through March 2026). Since his De-","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"cember 2019 incident, Henry has not violated his supervised re-","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"lease.","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"In August 2021, Henry and his wife had a son. But because","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"of the Act, Henry cannot live or reside overnight with him (and by","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"extension, his wife).","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"B. The Act","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"As we’ve noted, Alabama enacted the Alabama Sex Offender","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"Registration and Community Notification Act in 2011. The Ala-","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"bama Legislature identified the Act’s purpose as “not to punish sex","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"offenders but to protect the public and, most importantly, promote","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"child safety.” ALA. CODE § 15-20A-2(5).","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"The Act prohibits any sex offender from, among other","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"things, “resid[ing] or conduct[ing] an overnight visit with a minor”","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"unless the sex offender “is the parent, grandparent, stepparent, sib-","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"ling, or stepsibling of the minor.” Id. § 15-20A-11(d). Those ex-","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"emptions, though, are substantially less inclusive than they appear","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"at first glance. That’s so because Section 15-20A-11(d)’s exception","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"itself has five exceptions.","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"As relevant here, a sex offender may not “reside or conduct","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"an overnight visit with a minor,” even if they are the minor’s par-","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"ent, if “[t]he adult sex offender has been convicted of any sex of-","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"fense involving a child, regardless of whether the adult sex offender","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 5 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"6 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"was related to or shared a residence with the child victim.”2 Id. §","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"15-20A-11(d)(4). This subsection applies to Henry because a “sex","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"offense involving a child” includes “offense[s] involving child por-","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"nography.” Id. § 15-20A-4(27). And under Alabama law, child por-","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"nography includes “[a]ny visual depiction of an individual under 18","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"years of age engaged in any act of sexually explicit conduct, includ-","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"ing a virtually indistinguishable depiction.” Id. § 13A-12-190(2).","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"The Act’s definitions of “reside” and “conduct an overnight","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"visit” prevent Henry from living with his son.","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"Under Alabama law, a sex offender “reside[s]” at a place if","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"they are “habitually or systematically present at” it. Id. § 15-20A-","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"4(20). Courts determine whether a person meets that threshold, in","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"turn, “by the totality of the circumstances, including the amount","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"of time the person spends at the place and the nature of the per-","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"son’s conduct at the place.” Id. As a baseline, an offender “re-","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"side[s]” at a place if they “spend[] more than four hours a day” there","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"“on three or more consecutive days” or “more than four hours a","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"day” there “on 10 or more aggregate days during a calendar","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"month.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"2 None of the Act’s other four exceptions apply to Henry. Alabama has not","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"terminated (and is not currently terminating) Henry’s parental rights, ALA.","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"CODE § 15-20A-11(d)(1); Henry hasn’t been convicted of a sexual offense in-","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"volving his child or a minor with whom he resided, id. § 15-20A-11(d)(2), (3);","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"and he has not been convicted of a sexual offense involving the forcible com-","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"pulsion of a minor, id. § 15-20A-11(d)(5).","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 6 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 7","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"As for an “overnight visit,” that occurs whenever an offender","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"is in the same place as a minor for any part of the period “between","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"the hours of 10:30 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.” Id. § 15-20A-4(14) (explain-","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"ing “[a]ny presence” is an overnight visit).","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"So to sum up, Section 15-20A-11(d) prevents Henry from be-","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"ing present in the same home as his son (1) at any time between the","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"hours of 10:30 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.; (2) for more than four hours a","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"day on three consecutive days; (3) for more than four hours a day","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"on ten or more days during a calendar month; or (4) in any other","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"circumstance where he is habitually and systematically present at","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"his son’s home.","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"These restrictions are permanent. Alabama law affords no","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"offramp to Henry or anyone else: the Act contains no mechanism","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"for offenders to challenge its prohibitions on residing or staying","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"overnight with their own children. And that restriction persists for","paragraph_id":"para_176"},{"text":"the rest of the offender’s life. So even if the offender lives a law-","paragraph_id":"para_177"},{"text":"abiding life for decades after their conviction and later has a child,","paragraph_id":"para_178"},{"text":"they cannot live with that minor child. See id. § 15-20A-4(13). Nor","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"can they seek or obtain relief from the prohibition.","paragraph_id":"para_180"},{"text":"C. Procedural History","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"After Henry and his wife had their son, Henry sued the Sher-","paragraph_id":"para_182"},{"text":"iff and District Attorney of Tuscaloosa County and the Attorney","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"General of Alabama. He sought to enjoin enforcement of the Act’s","paragraph_id":"para_184"},{"text":"prohibition against residing with his son. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983.","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"When Henry and the Defendants moved for summary judgment,","paragraph_id":"para_186"},{"text":"the district court granted Henry’s motion. The court declared the","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 7 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_188"},{"text":"8 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"Act’s prohibition against a parent living with their children facially","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"unconstitutional and universally enjoined its enforcement.","paragraph_id":"para_191"},{"text":"A panel of this Court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"vacated and remanded in part. Henry v. Sheriff of Tuscaloosa Cnty.,","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"135 F.4th 1271, 1329 (11th Cir. 2025), reh’g en banc granted, opinion","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"vacated, Henry v. Sheriff of Tuscaloosa Cnty., 150 F.4th 1370 (11th Cir.","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"2025). It ruled that the prohibition against a parent residing with","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"their own children, as applied, burdened Henry’s “fundamental","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"right to live with and raise [his] child.” Id. at 1293. The panel also","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"held that the prohibition didn’t satisfy strict scrutiny. Id. at 1314.","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"As to the district court’s determination that the prohibition was fa-","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"cially unconstitutional and the corresponding universal injunction,","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"the panel concluded that the district court erred, so the panel va-","paragraph_id":"para_202"},{"text":"cated the injunction. Id. at 1325, 1328.","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"Sitting en banc, we vacated the panel opinion and reheard","paragraph_id":"para_204"},{"text":"the case. In those proceedings, Alabama argued that parents who","paragraph_id":"para_205"},{"text":"engage in misconduct, including receiving a child-sex-offense con-","paragraph_id":"para_206"},{"text":"viction like Henry, lack a fundamental right to live with their chil-","paragraph_id":"para_207"},{"text":"dren. We rejected Alabama’s position. Henry v. Sheriff of Tuscaloosa","paragraph_id":"para_208"},{"text":"Cnty., 180 F.4th 1294, 1298 (11th Cir. 2026) (“Henry II”). Rather, we","paragraph_id":"para_209"},{"text":"held that Henry enjoys a fundamental right to live with his chil-","paragraph_id":"para_210"},{"text":"dren. Id. Because the Act deprives Henry of that right, we ex-","paragraph_id":"para_211"},{"text":"plained, we must apply strict scrutiny to it to determine whether,","paragraph_id":"para_212"},{"text":"as applied to Henry, the Act is constitutional. Id. at 1302. As an en","paragraph_id":"para_213"},{"text":"banc Court, we remanded the case to the panel to conduct that","paragraph_id":"para_214"},{"text":"analysis. Id. at 1319. We address that issue now.","paragraph_id":"para_215"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 8 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_216"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 9","paragraph_id":"para_217"},{"text":"II. STANDARD OF REVIEW","paragraph_id":"para_218"},{"text":"We review de novo a district court’s grant of summary judg-","paragraph_id":"para_219"},{"text":"ment, construing all evidence in the light most favorable to the","paragraph_id":"para_220"},{"text":"non-moving party. Marbury v. Warden, 936 F.3d 1227, 1232 (11th Cir.","paragraph_id":"para_221"},{"text":"2019). Summary judgment is appropriate when no genuine issue","paragraph_id":"para_222"},{"text":"of material fact exists and the moving party is entitled to judgment","paragraph_id":"para_223"},{"text":"as a matter of law. FED. R. CIV. P. 56(a); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477","paragraph_id":"para_224"},{"text":"U.S. 317, 322–23 (1986). An issue of fact is genuine if a reasonable","paragraph_id":"para_225"},{"text":"trier of fact could return judgment for the non-moving party. An-","paragraph_id":"para_226"},{"text":"derson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). And a fact is","paragraph_id":"para_227"},{"text":"material if it “might affect the outcome of the suit under the gov-","paragraph_id":"para_228"},{"text":"erning law” and is not “irrelevant or unnecessary.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_229"},{"text":"III. DISCUSSION","paragraph_id":"para_230"},{"text":"We divide our discussion into two parts. First, we review","paragraph_id":"para_231"},{"text":"the framework for evaluating substantive-due-process claims. Sec-","paragraph_id":"para_232"},{"text":"ond, we apply strict scrutiny to the Act as applied to Henry.","paragraph_id":"para_233"},{"text":"A. The Substantive-due-process Framework3","paragraph_id":"para_234"},{"text":"The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment","paragraph_id":"para_235"},{"text":"prohibits any state from “depriv[ing] any person of life, liberty, or","paragraph_id":"para_236"},{"text":"property, without due process of law.” U.S. CONST. amend. XIV,","paragraph_id":"para_237"},{"text":"§ 1. Its guarantee is both procedural and substantive. Washington","paragraph_id":"para_238"},{"text":"v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 719–20 (1997). When, as here, a plaintiff","paragraph_id":"para_239"},{"text":"3 As with much of the background section, we reprint much of our discussion","paragraph_id":"para_240"},{"text":"of the substantive-due-process framework from the en banc opinion with very","paragraph_id":"para_241"},{"text":"few updates. Again, not much has changed since then.","paragraph_id":"para_242"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 9 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_243"},{"text":"10 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_244"},{"text":"asserts a violation of his substantive-due-process rights caused by","paragraph_id":"para_245"},{"text":"legislation, we generally use a two-step framework to resolve the","paragraph_id":"para_246"},{"text":"claim. That framework employs two tracks.4","paragraph_id":"para_247"},{"text":"The first step of the framework dictates which track the","paragraph_id":"para_248"},{"text":"analysis takes. That step requires us to determine whether a right","paragraph_id":"para_249"},{"text":"is “fundamental.” Id. at 710. Rights are fundamental if they are","paragraph_id":"para_250"},{"text":"“objectively, deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition,","paragraph_id":"para_251"},{"text":"and implicit in the concept of ordered liberty, such that neither lib-","paragraph_id":"para_252"},{"text":"erty nor justice would exist if they were sacrificed.” Id. at 721","paragraph_id":"para_253"},{"text":"(cleaned up). Rights that don’t satisfy this test are non-fundamen-","paragraph_id":"para_254"},{"text":"tal.","paragraph_id":"para_255"},{"text":"At the second step, we apply the correct level of scrutiny to","paragraph_id":"para_256"},{"text":"the challenged government action. The level of scrutiny depends","paragraph_id":"para_257"},{"text":"on whether we are on the fundamental-rights track or the non-fun-","paragraph_id":"para_258"},{"text":"damental-rights track.","paragraph_id":"para_259"},{"text":"On the fundamental-rights track, we scrutinize the govern-","paragraph_id":"para_260"},{"text":"ment action. We do so because the deeply rooted and historically","paragraph_id":"para_261"},{"text":"important nature of fundamental rights entitles them to more pro-","paragraph_id":"para_262"},{"text":"tection from the government than non-fundamental rights. If the","paragraph_id":"para_263"},{"text":"right is fundamental, the government action that encumbers the","paragraph_id":"para_264"},{"text":"right is presumptively wrongful, and the government bears the bur-","paragraph_id":"para_265"},{"text":"den to show that its action is “narrowly tailored to serve a","paragraph_id":"para_266"},{"text":"4 When a plaintiff contends that executive action violates his substantive-due-","paragraph_id":"para_267"},{"text":"process rights, the question is whether the challenged conduct “shocks the","paragraph_id":"para_268"},{"text":"conscience.” County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833, 846–48 (1998).","paragraph_id":"para_269"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 10 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_270"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 11","paragraph_id":"para_271"},{"text":"compelling state interest.” Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292, 302 (1993).","paragraph_id":"para_272"},{"text":"We call this level of review strict scrutiny. Lofton v. Sec’y of Dep’t of","paragraph_id":"para_273"},{"text":"Child. & Fam. Servs., 358 F.3d 804, 815 (11th Cir. 2004). Although","paragraph_id":"para_274"},{"text":"strict scrutiny allows the government to regulate and even abrogate","paragraph_id":"para_275"},{"text":"fundamental rights, it ensures that, when the government does so,","paragraph_id":"para_276"},{"text":"it must act in a way that fundamental rights receive the respect and","paragraph_id":"para_277"},{"text":"protection they are due.","paragraph_id":"para_278"},{"text":"In contrast, on the non-fundamental rights track, we only","paragraph_id":"para_279"},{"text":"lightly review the challenged government action. We presume the","paragraph_id":"para_280"},{"text":"government has acted lawfully, and we reject the plaintiff’s claim","paragraph_id":"para_281"},{"text":"so long as the government action is “rationally related to legitimate","paragraph_id":"para_282"},{"text":"government interests.” Glucksberg, 521 U.S. at 728. This is rational-","paragraph_id":"para_283"},{"text":"basis review. Under it, we sustain the government’s action if “there","paragraph_id":"para_284"},{"text":"is any reasonably conceivable state of facts that could provide a ra-","paragraph_id":"para_285"},{"text":"tional basis” for it. FCC v. Beach Commcn’s, Inc., 508 U.S. 307, 313","paragraph_id":"para_286"},{"text":"(1993); see Williamson v. Lee Optical of Okla. Inc., 348 U.S. 483, 488","paragraph_id":"para_287"},{"text":"(1955).","paragraph_id":"para_288"},{"text":"So to be clear, that a right is fundamental does not end the","paragraph_id":"para_289"},{"text":"inquiry. A right’s fundamental status does not mean the govern-","paragraph_id":"para_290"},{"text":"ment can’t regulate it. Indeed, the government can and does con-","paragraph_id":"para_291"},{"text":"stitutionally burden fundamental rights when it invokes a compel-","paragraph_id":"para_292"},{"text":"ling interest and narrowly tailors its law to further that interest.","paragraph_id":"para_293"},{"text":"During the en banc proceedings here, we determined that","paragraph_id":"para_294"},{"text":"Henry enjoys a fundamental right to live with his children, despite","paragraph_id":"para_295"},{"text":"his conviction. Henry II, 180 F.4th at 1298. That puts us on the","paragraph_id":"para_296"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 11 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_297"},{"text":"12 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_298"},{"text":"fundamental-rights track. So we must apply strict scrutiny to the","paragraph_id":"para_299"},{"text":"Act as applied to Henry.","paragraph_id":"para_300"},{"text":"B. The Act fails strict scrutiny as applied to Henry.","paragraph_id":"para_301"},{"text":"Because we review the Act on the strict-scrutiny track, Ala-","paragraph_id":"para_302"},{"text":"bama bears the burden to show that its action is “narrowly tailored","paragraph_id":"para_303"},{"text":"to serve a compelling state interest.” Flores, 507 U.S. at 302.","paragraph_id":"para_304"},{"text":"Alabama certainly has a “compelling interest.” Indeed, it “is","paragraph_id":"para_305"},{"text":"indisputable ‘that a State’s interest in safeguarding the physical and","paragraph_id":"para_306"},{"text":"psychological well-being of a minor is compelling.’” Otto v. City of","paragraph_id":"para_307"},{"text":"Boca Raton, 981 F.3d 854, 868 (11th Cir. 2020) (quoting New York v.","paragraph_id":"para_308"},{"text":"Ferber, 458 U.S. 747, 756–57 (1982)).","paragraph_id":"para_309"},{"text":"But “it is not enough for the [State] to identify a compelling","paragraph_id":"para_310"},{"text":"interest.” Id. “To survive strict scrutiny,” Alabama “must prove”","paragraph_id":"para_311"},{"text":"that Section 15-20A-11(d)(4) furthers “that compelling interest and”","paragraph_id":"para_312"},{"text":"is “narrowly tailored to that end.” Id. (cleaned up). Tailoring is","paragraph_id":"para_313"},{"text":"especially important in cases like this one, which involve familial","paragraph_id":"para_314"},{"text":"rights. After all, the State has no compelling interest in removing","paragraph_id":"para_315"},{"text":"children from parents who are in fact competent to love and care","paragraph_id":"para_316"},{"text":"for them. See Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645, 652 (1972) (“[T]he","paragraph_id":"para_317"},{"text":"State registers no gain towards its declared goals when it separates","paragraph_id":"para_318"},{"text":"children from the custody of fit parents.”); Santosky v. Kramer, 455","paragraph_id":"para_319"},{"text":"U.S. 745, 760 (1982) (“[U]ntil the State proves parental unfitness,","paragraph_id":"para_320"},{"text":"the child and his parents share a vital interest in preventing errone-","paragraph_id":"para_321"},{"text":"ous termination of their natural relationship.”).","paragraph_id":"para_322"},{"text":"Three factors guide our determination on whether state ac-","paragraph_id":"para_323"},{"text":"tion is sufficiently tailored: overinclusiveness, underinclusiveness,","paragraph_id":"para_324"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 12 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_325"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 13","paragraph_id":"para_326"},{"text":"and the opportunity to enact less restrictive alternatives. See Brown","paragraph_id":"para_327"},{"text":"v. Ent. Merchs. Ass’n, 564 U.S. 786, 805 (2011) (explaining that com-","paragraph_id":"para_328"},{"text":"pelling interests “must be pursued by means that are neither seri-","paragraph_id":"para_329"},{"text":"ously underinclusive nor seriously overinclusive”); Dep’t of State v.","paragraph_id":"para_330"},{"text":"Muñoz, 602 U.S. 899, 919 (2024) (acknowledging that a burden on a","paragraph_id":"para_331"},{"text":"fundamental right “trigger[s]” the government’s “obligation to","paragraph_id":"para_332"},{"text":"demonstrate” that its action “is the least restrictive means of serv-","paragraph_id":"para_333"},{"text":"ing” its compelling “interest”). The Act fails on all three fronts.","paragraph_id":"para_334"},{"text":"A. The Act is overinclusive.","paragraph_id":"para_335"},{"text":"A law is overinclusive when it regulates too much conduct.","paragraph_id":"para_336"},{"text":"In other words, the law applies to people for whom the govern-","paragraph_id":"para_337"},{"text":"ment lacks a compelling interest in regulating. Overinclusive cases","paragraph_id":"para_338"},{"text":"present the greatest constitutional concern because the govern-","paragraph_id":"para_339"},{"text":"ment abridges constitutional rights without justification. See","paragraph_id":"para_340"},{"text":"Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 390 (1978) (concluding a statute","paragraph_id":"para_341"},{"text":"forbidding marriage without a court order was “substantially over-","paragraph_id":"para_342"},{"text":"inclusive” because it possibly prevented individuals, through mar-","paragraph_id":"para_343"},{"text":"riage to wealthy spouses, from “improving their ability to satisfy”","paragraph_id":"para_344"},{"text":"the prior familial support obligations that Wisconsin claimed to en-","paragraph_id":"para_345"},{"text":"act the statute to secure); cf. City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr.,","paragraph_id":"para_346"},{"text":"473 U.S. 432, 448 (1985) (“[T]he record does not reveal any rational","paragraph_id":"para_347"},{"text":"basis for believing that the Featherston home would pose any spe-","paragraph_id":"para_348"},{"text":"cial threat to the city’s legitimate interests.”).","paragraph_id":"para_349"},{"text":"Narrow tailoring does not require “perfect tailoring.” Wil-","paragraph_id":"para_350"},{"text":"liams-Yulee v. Fla. Bar, 575 U.S. 433, 454 (2015). Yet state action is","paragraph_id":"para_351"},{"text":"not narrowly tailored if it advances the state’s compelling interest","paragraph_id":"para_352"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 13 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_353"},{"text":"14 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_354"},{"text":"in only “some” cases. Stanley, 405 U.S. at 654; Ent. Merchs. Ass’n,","paragraph_id":"para_355"},{"text":"564 U.S. at 804.","paragraph_id":"para_356"},{"text":"And that’s a problem with the Act. Alabama asserts that the","paragraph_id":"para_357"},{"text":"Act advances its compelling interest by “not giving convicted child","paragraph_id":"para_358"},{"text":"sex offenders a ready opportunity to offend again.” But a convic-","paragraph_id":"para_359"},{"text":"tion that qualifies under the Act does not alone predict with sub-","paragraph_id":"para_360"},{"text":"stantial precision an offender’s likelihood of harming their own","paragraph_id":"para_361"},{"text":"child. Nor does such a conviction offer, as Alabama law and our","paragraph_id":"para_362"},{"text":"Constitution usually require, “clear and convincing evidence” that","paragraph_id":"para_363"},{"text":"the regulated individual “is unsuited or unfit to assume the place of","paragraph_id":"para_364"},{"text":"a [parent] in providing a safe and comfortable home . . . .” Ex parte","paragraph_id":"para_365"},{"text":"Sullivan, 407 So. 2d 559, 563 (Ala. 1981) (quoting Chandler v. What-","paragraph_id":"para_366"},{"text":"ley, 189 So. 751, 753 (1939)); see Santosky, 455 U.S. at 769 (requiring","paragraph_id":"para_367"},{"text":"the clear-and-convincing standard of proof to terminate parental","paragraph_id":"para_368"},{"text":"rights).","paragraph_id":"para_369"},{"text":"At its broadest, the Act covers some crimes that sustain little","paragraph_id":"para_370"},{"text":"to no rational inference that a parent is likely to harm their child.","paragraph_id":"para_371"},{"text":"For instance, the Act would bar from residing with their child a 19-","paragraph_id":"para_372"},{"text":"year-old college freshman convicted of downloading sexually ex-","paragraph_id":"para_373"},{"text":"plicit content that their 16-year-old high-school sweetheart sent","paragraph_id":"para_374"},{"text":"them. And because the Law operates forever without exception,","paragraph_id":"para_375"},{"text":"that categorical bar would remain even if the 19-year-old college","paragraph_id":"para_376"},{"text":"freshman later married his high-school sweetheart and fathered a","paragraph_id":"para_377"},{"text":"child with her after living decades of a law-abiding life. Alabama","paragraph_id":"para_378"},{"text":"offers no justification for treating that person exactly like one who","paragraph_id":"para_379"},{"text":"just last week trafficked or raped children.","paragraph_id":"para_380"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 14 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_381"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 15","paragraph_id":"para_382"},{"text":"And for at least some of the core conduct the Act targets, the","paragraph_id":"para_383"},{"text":"sole fact of a conviction is not sufficiently tailored to advance Ala-","paragraph_id":"para_384"},{"text":"bama’s interests in protecting children. The parties hotly contest","paragraph_id":"para_385"},{"text":"whether a qualifying conviction, specifically a child-pornography","paragraph_id":"para_386"},{"text":"conviction, may adequately stand in for the danger that a parent","paragraph_id":"para_387"},{"text":"poses to a child. They do so primarily through expert testimony","paragraph_id":"para_388"},{"text":"on the recidivism rates for sex offenders generally and child-por-","paragraph_id":"para_389"},{"text":"nography offenders specifically. Cf. United States v. Kebodeaux, 570","paragraph_id":"para_390"},{"text":"U.S. 387, 396 (2013) (acknowledging that, generally, there is “con-","paragraph_id":"para_391"},{"text":"flicting evidence” on sex offenders’ recidivism rates). We briefly","paragraph_id":"para_392"},{"text":"recount that evidentiary debate, crediting the evidence Alabama","paragraph_id":"para_393"},{"text":"marshaled. But even applying our summary-judgment standard of","paragraph_id":"para_394"},{"text":"review, Alabama has not shown the Act is narrowly tailored.","paragraph_id":"para_395"},{"text":"Alabama relies mostly on three figures to argue that child-","paragraph_id":"para_396"},{"text":"pornography offenders recidivate at a high rate and therefore pose","paragraph_id":"para_397"},{"text":"a continuing danger to their own children. First, Alabama suggests","paragraph_id":"para_398"},{"text":"that within five years of release, an estimated 9.2% to 46% of child-","paragraph_id":"para_399"},{"text":"pornography offenders will commit another sex offense. It reaches","paragraph_id":"para_400"},{"text":"that estimate by multiplying a five-year sex-offense recidivism rate","paragraph_id":"para_401"},{"text":"for child-pornography offenders (4.6%) by its experts’ claim that ac-","paragraph_id":"para_402"},{"text":"tual recidivism rates are undercounted at a multiple of two to ten","paragraph_id":"para_403"},{"text":"times the reported figures. Second, the State asserts that 50%—and","paragraph_id":"para_404"},{"text":"up to 85%—of child-pornography offenders have previously com-","paragraph_id":"para_405"},{"text":"mitted a contact offense against a child (meaning an offense involv-","paragraph_id":"para_406"},{"text":"ing the sexual molestation of a child). And third, Alabama argues","paragraph_id":"para_407"},{"text":"that, for those who have committed a contact offense and have re-","paragraph_id":"para_408"},{"text":"cidivated, about a quarter did so even after ten years of living free","paragraph_id":"para_409"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 15 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_410"},{"text":"16 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_411"},{"text":"in their community. So the risk an offender poses, the State posits,","paragraph_id":"para_412"},{"text":"does not decrease over time.","paragraph_id":"para_413"},{"text":"Henry disputes the relevance and the accuracy of some of","paragraph_id":"para_414"},{"text":"these figures. He counters that Alabama fails to differentiate be-","paragraph_id":"para_415"},{"text":"tween child-pornography offenders who have committed a contact","paragraph_id":"para_416"},{"text":"offense in the past and those who have not. And Henry’s expert","paragraph_id":"para_417"},{"text":"proffered that less than 2% of—that is, not even one in fifty—of-","paragraph_id":"para_418"},{"text":"fenders who have only viewed or possessed child pornography, like","paragraph_id":"para_419"},{"text":"Henry, commit a future contact offense.","paragraph_id":"para_420"},{"text":"Henry also contests the extrapolations the State makes from","paragraph_id":"para_421"},{"text":"its estimates of unreported recidivism. Alabama’s unreported-","paragraph_id":"para_422"},{"text":"crime-multiplier, Henry’s expert claims, relies on unreported","paragraph_id":"para_423"},{"text":"crimes committed by those who have not yet been caught, not re-","paragraph_id":"para_424"},{"text":"cidivism rates of those who have been convicted of an offense, like","paragraph_id":"para_425"},{"text":"Henry. Henry’s expert also argues that the risk of sexual recidivism","paragraph_id":"para_426"},{"text":"halves every five years a person lives in the community as a law-","paragraph_id":"para_427"},{"text":"abiding citizen. After around ten to fifteen years, Henry adds, most","paragraph_id":"para_428"},{"text":"people who have committed a sex offense are no more likely to","paragraph_id":"para_429"},{"text":"commit a new sex offense than are those with a non-sexual criminal","paragraph_id":"para_430"},{"text":"history. And for low-risk sex offenders, Henry’s expert points out","paragraph_id":"para_431"},{"text":"that it may take only five years to pose a risk that is statistically","paragraph_id":"para_432"},{"text":"indistinguishable from that of other non-sexual offenders.","paragraph_id":"para_433"},{"text":"Of course, we don’t wade into these factual disputes at the","paragraph_id":"para_434"},{"text":"summary-judgment stage. Rather, we must draw all reasonable","paragraph_id":"para_435"},{"text":"inferences in favor of the non-movant (here, Alabama). Marbury,","paragraph_id":"para_436"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 16 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_437"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 17","paragraph_id":"para_438"},{"text":"936 F.3d at 1232. But even under the summary-judgment standard,","paragraph_id":"para_439"},{"text":"Alabama has not carried its burden. That is so for two reasons.","paragraph_id":"para_440"},{"text":"First, none of the figures Alabama proffers show that","paragraph_id":"para_441"},{"text":"Henry’s qualifying conviction necessarily makes him and others like","paragraph_id":"para_442"},{"text":"him, without more, a danger to their children. The Act doesn’t","paragraph_id":"para_443"},{"text":"distinguish between offenders like Henry—who haven’t commit-","paragraph_id":"para_444"},{"text":"ted a previous contact offense and appear statistically unlikely to","paragraph_id":"para_445"},{"text":"commit one in the future—and offenders who have committed a","paragraph_id":"para_446"},{"text":"previous contact offense and who may be more likely to commit","paragraph_id":"para_447"},{"text":"another. In other words, Alabama defends its Law by relying on","paragraph_id":"para_448"},{"text":"material distinctions the law itself does not make and which do not","paragraph_id":"para_449"},{"text":"even apply to offenders in Henry’s shoes. That is a concession of","paragraph_id":"para_450"},{"text":"overinclusiveness.","paragraph_id":"para_451"},{"text":"To be sure, the premise of Alabama’s position is that many","paragraph_id":"para_452"},{"text":"sexual offenses go unreported, so broad legislative categories are","paragraph_id":"para_453"},{"text":"necessary to prevent likely contact offenders from recidivating with","paragraph_id":"para_454"},{"text":"their own child. But as applied to the Act, that logic just uses a","paragraph_id":"para_455"},{"text":"child-pornography conviction as a proxy for offenders who have","paragraph_id":"para_456"},{"text":"previously committed a contact offense, even when they haven’t.","paragraph_id":"para_457"},{"text":"Then the Act uses the first proxy as a second proxy for the disposi-","paragraph_id":"para_458"},{"text":"tive conclusion that the regulated offender poses a threat to their","paragraph_id":"para_459"},{"text":"own child. See Stanley, 405 U.S. at 657 (holding, in parental-rights","paragraph_id":"para_460"},{"text":"cases, “the determinative issues” are “competency and care”). But","paragraph_id":"para_461"},{"text":"this logic—twice removed from Henry’s non-contact situation—","paragraph_id":"para_462"},{"text":"falls apart as soon as we look at the record, which offers no direct","paragraph_id":"para_463"},{"text":"evidence that child-pornography-only offenders like Henry pose a","paragraph_id":"para_464"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 17 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_465"},{"text":"18 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_466"},{"text":"danger to their children. In this respect, Section 15-20A-11(d)(4)","paragraph_id":"para_467"},{"text":"sweeps with too broad a brush.","paragraph_id":"para_468"},{"text":"Second, even if we disregard that error, the overinclusive-","paragraph_id":"para_469"},{"text":"ness problems persist. The most relevant statistic the State prof-","paragraph_id":"para_470"},{"text":"fered was its first: that 9.2% to 46% of child-pornography offenders","paragraph_id":"para_471"},{"text":"will commit another sex offense.","paragraph_id":"para_472"},{"text":"That figure raises several questions. For starters, it includes","paragraph_id":"para_473"},{"text":"a substantial range because it depends on estimates of the amount","paragraph_id":"para_474"},{"text":"of unreported recidivism. That range of uncertainty—a span of","paragraph_id":"para_475"},{"text":"about 37 percentage points—is so large that it makes the estimate","paragraph_id":"para_476"},{"text":"of recidivism meaningless.","paragraph_id":"para_477"},{"text":"Plus, even crediting the highest recidivism rate in that range,","paragraph_id":"para_478"},{"text":"as we must in this posture, still more than half the parents the law","paragraph_id":"para_479"},{"text":"prevents from residing with their children will not pose a danger to","paragraph_id":"para_480"},{"text":"them. Indeed, our sister circuits have determined that a conviction","paragraph_id":"para_481"},{"text":"for viewing child-pornography images, without more, does not es-","paragraph_id":"para_482"},{"text":"tablish that an offender is a danger to their own child. See, e.g.,","paragraph_id":"para_483"},{"text":"United States v. Davis, 452 F.3d 991, 995 (8th Cir. 2006) (finding","paragraph_id":"para_484"},{"text":"“plain error” where a district court barred a child-pornography of-","paragraph_id":"para_485"},{"text":"fender from having unsupervised contact with his own daughter","paragraph_id":"para_486"},{"text":"where there was “no evidence that he has abused a child”); United","paragraph_id":"para_487"},{"text":"States v. Bear, 769 F.3d 1221, 1229 (10th Cir. 2014) (vacating condi-","paragraph_id":"para_488"},{"text":"tions limiting Bear’s ability to reside with his children because, de-","paragraph_id":"para_489"},{"text":"spite his prior sex offenses, the record did not show “a danger to his","paragraph_id":"para_490"},{"text":"own three children”); United States v. Del Valle-Cruz, 785 F.3d 48, 64","paragraph_id":"para_491"},{"text":"(1st Cir. 2015) (same); United States v. Worley, 685 F.3d 404, 408–09","paragraph_id":"para_492"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 18 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_493"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 19","paragraph_id":"para_494"},{"text":"(4th Cir. 2012) (same). Of course, any new contact offense is truly","paragraph_id":"para_495"},{"text":"a tragedy. But so is depriving a child of a caring, competent, loving","paragraph_id":"para_496"},{"text":"parent who presents no danger to the child. And although narrow","paragraph_id":"para_497"},{"text":"tailoring does not require “perfect tailoring,” Williams-Yulee, 575","paragraph_id":"para_498"},{"text":"U.S. at 454, it demands more than a coin flip.","paragraph_id":"para_499"},{"text":"Other courts have held as much, declaring unconstitutional","paragraph_id":"para_500"},{"text":"statutes that terminate parental rights based solely on the fact of a","paragraph_id":"para_501"},{"text":"conviction, because they ignored individualized evidence relevant","paragraph_id":"para_502"},{"text":"to a parent’s fitness. See, e.g., In re Amanda D., 811 N.E.2d 1237,","paragraph_id":"para_503"},{"text":"1242 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004) (“We conclude that a conviction of aggra-","paragraph_id":"para_504"},{"text":"vated battery to a child is not an adequate proxy for unfitness” be-","paragraph_id":"para_505"},{"text":"cause it “fails to take into account several things relevant to the ul-","paragraph_id":"para_506"},{"text":"timate fitness determination.”), aff’d sub nom. In re D.W., 827 N.E.2d","paragraph_id":"para_507"},{"text":"466 (Ill. 2005).","paragraph_id":"para_508"},{"text":"In short, Alabama cannot justify abridging fundamental","paragraph_id":"para_509"},{"text":"rights by advancing its compelling state interests in “some” cases.","paragraph_id":"para_510"},{"text":"See Stanley, 405 U.S. at 654 (“But all unmarried fathers are not in","paragraph_id":"para_511"},{"text":"this category; some are wholly suited to have custody of their chil-","paragraph_id":"para_512"},{"text":"dren.”); Ent. Merchs. Ass’n, 564 U.S. at 804 (“[S]ome of the legisla-","paragraph_id":"para_513"},{"text":"tion’s effect may indeed be in support of what some parents of the","paragraph_id":"para_514"},{"text":"restricted children actually want . . . . [But] [t]his is not the narrow","paragraph_id":"para_515"},{"text":"tailoring to ‘assisting parents’ that restriction of First Amendment","paragraph_id":"para_516"},{"text":"rights requires.”). And that’s especially so when, as we discuss","paragraph_id":"para_517"},{"text":"later, the Act doesn’t even safeguard against those who are danger-","paragraph_id":"para_518"},{"text":"ous to their children. Plus, Alabama has other tools at its disposal","paragraph_id":"para_519"},{"text":"to protect its children. The Act is fatally overinclusive.","paragraph_id":"para_520"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 19 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_521"},{"text":"20 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_522"},{"text":"B. Alabama’s Law is underinclusive.","paragraph_id":"para_523"},{"text":"The Act is also underinclusive. A law is underinclusive if it","paragraph_id":"para_524"},{"text":"leaves unregulated similar conduct that also threatens the compel-","paragraph_id":"para_525"},{"text":"ling interest that the state action purports to advance. Reed v. Town","paragraph_id":"para_526"},{"text":"of Gilbert, 576 U.S. 155, 172 (2015). We assess a state action’s un-","paragraph_id":"para_527"},{"text":"derinclusiveness because a “woefully underinclusive” act may un-","paragraph_id":"para_528"},{"text":"dermine our belief that the government truly wishes to advance its","paragraph_id":"para_529"},{"text":"asserted interest. Republican Party of Minn. v. White, 536 U.S. 765,","paragraph_id":"para_530"},{"text":"780 (2002); see City of Ladue v. Gilleo, 512 U.S. 43, 52–53 (1994) (ex-","paragraph_id":"para_531"},{"text":"plaining underinclusiveness “diminish[es] the credibility of the gov-","paragraph_id":"para_532"},{"text":"ernment’s rationale” for regulating fundamental rights).","paragraph_id":"para_533"},{"text":"Underinclusiveness doesn’t raise the same constitutional","paragraph_id":"para_534"},{"text":"concerns as does overinclusiveness. And some underinclusive sit-","paragraph_id":"para_535"},{"text":"uations may arise, as here, when no reasonable person would","paragraph_id":"para_536"},{"text":"doubt that the government is genuine in its efforts to advance its","paragraph_id":"para_537"},{"text":"asserted interest. Plus, the government “need not address all as-","paragraph_id":"para_538"},{"text":"pects of a problem in one fell swoop.” Williams-Yulee, 575 U.S. at","paragraph_id":"para_539"},{"text":"449. But even so, the state bears the burden of identifying “good","paragraph_id":"para_540"},{"text":"reason[s]” for “singl[ing] out” the conduct it did regulate. TikTok","paragraph_id":"para_541"},{"text":"Inc. v. Garland, 604 U.S. 56, 75 (2025). And to the extent the gov-","paragraph_id":"para_542"},{"text":"ernment leaves unregulated some conduct that may undermine its","paragraph_id":"para_543"},{"text":"asserted interest, that fact may hamper the government’s ability to","paragraph_id":"para_544"},{"text":"disprove the viability of proffered less restrictive alternatives.","paragraph_id":"para_545"},{"text":"The Act is puzzlingly underinclusive. The statute doesn’t","paragraph_id":"para_546"},{"text":"prohibit a covered offender from unsupervised visitation with “his","paragraph_id":"para_547"},{"text":"or her child at the residence of the criminal sex offender where the","paragraph_id":"para_548"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 20 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_549"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 21","paragraph_id":"para_550"},{"text":"child does not also reside.” S.A.N. v. S.E.N., 995 So. 2d 175, 178","paragraph_id":"para_551"},{"text":"(Ala. Civ. App. 2008). That is, it “allows every qualifying adult sex","paragraph_id":"para_552"},{"text":"offender daily unsupervised access to minors for four hours at a","paragraph_id":"para_553"},{"text":"time in any one place on two consecutive days and nine aggregate","paragraph_id":"para_554"},{"text":"days per month, as long as such access occurs between the hours","paragraph_id":"para_555"},{"text":"of 6:00 a.m. and 10:30 p.m.” Henry v. Abernathy, 711 F. Supp. 3d","paragraph_id":"para_556"},{"text":"1300, 1305 (M.D. Ala. Jan 10, 2024).","paragraph_id":"para_557"},{"text":"So while Alabama burdens many who may be fit to love and","paragraph_id":"para_558"},{"text":"care for their children, at the same time, it may allow those who","paragraph_id":"para_559"},{"text":"are in fact a danger to minors (for instance, those who have com-","paragraph_id":"para_560"},{"text":"mitted a contact offense against a child) to enjoy unsupervised ac-","paragraph_id":"para_561"},{"text":"cess to their next potential victims. That is not the sort of narrow","paragraph_id":"para_562"},{"text":"tailoring strict scrutiny looks favorably upon.","paragraph_id":"para_563"},{"text":"To be clear, we don’t doubt that the Act reflects Alabama’s","paragraph_id":"para_564"},{"text":"genuine efforts to secure the safety and wellbeing of its children.","paragraph_id":"para_565"},{"text":"We believe the State is sincere in exercising its parens patriae au-","paragraph_id":"para_566"},{"text":"thority to the benefit of its citizenry. Maybe the legislature afforded","paragraph_id":"para_567"},{"text":"even dangerous offenders the visitation rights we’ve just discussed","paragraph_id":"para_568"},{"text":"to allow their children the benefit of a relationship with their par-","paragraph_id":"para_569"},{"text":"ent, subject to a judicial determination that visitation is not in the","paragraph_id":"para_570"},{"text":"child’s best interest. See S.A.N., 995 So. 2d at 178–79. But under","paragraph_id":"para_571"},{"text":"strict scrutiny, where we must consider a law’s effectiveness","paragraph_id":"para_572"},{"text":"against less restrictive alternatives, a “law cannot be regarded as","paragraph_id":"para_573"},{"text":"protecting an interest of the highest order, and thus as justifying a","paragraph_id":"para_574"},{"text":"restriction on [fundamental rights], when it leaves appreciable","paragraph_id":"para_575"},{"text":"damage to that supposedly vital interest unprohibited.” Reed, 576","paragraph_id":"para_576"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 21 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_577"},{"text":"22 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_578"},{"text":"U.S. at 172 (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Republican","paragraph_id":"para_579"},{"text":"Party of Minn., 536 U.S. at 780).","paragraph_id":"para_580"},{"text":"C. Alabama has less restrictive alternatives to the Act.","paragraph_id":"para_581"},{"text":"That brings us to the next factor. State action infringing fun-","paragraph_id":"para_582"},{"text":"damental rights fails strict scrutiny “if less restrictive alternatives","paragraph_id":"para_583"},{"text":"would be at least as effective in achieving the legitimate purpose","paragraph_id":"para_584"},{"text":"that the statute was enacted to serve.” Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844,","paragraph_id":"para_585"},{"text":"874 (1997). Put simply, “the government cannot” advance a com-","paragraph_id":"para_586"},{"text":"pelling interest “by means that ‘broadly stifle fundamental personal","paragraph_id":"para_587"},{"text":"liberties when the end can be more narrowly achieved.’” Lynch v.","paragraph_id":"para_588"},{"text":"Baxley, 744 F.2d 1452, 1459 (11th Cir. 1984) (quoting Shelton v.","paragraph_id":"para_589"},{"text":"Tucker, 364 U.S. 479, 488 (1960)).","paragraph_id":"para_590"},{"text":"That doesn’t mean that states must affirmatively proffer and","paragraph_id":"para_591"},{"text":"then rebut less restrictive alternatives. United States v. Grady, 18","paragraph_id":"para_592"},{"text":"F.4th 1275, 1286 n.12 (11th Cir. 2021) (discussing least-restrictive","paragraph_id":"para_593"},{"text":"alternatives under the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act); see","paragraph_id":"para_594"},{"text":"also Knight v. Thompson, 797 F.3d 934, 946 (11th Cir. 2015) (acknowl-","paragraph_id":"para_595"},{"text":"edging that, at least under the Religious Land Use and Institution-","paragraph_id":"para_596"},{"text":"alized Persons Act, we split on this issue with the First and Third","paragraph_id":"para_597"},{"text":"Circuits, which require that governments show they considered","paragraph_id":"para_598"},{"text":"and rejected less restrictive alternatives). But if a plaintiff “pre-","paragraph_id":"para_599"},{"text":"sent[s]” the government “with a plausible, less restrictive alterna-","paragraph_id":"para_600"},{"text":"tive,” the government must “prove the alternative to be ineffec-","paragraph_id":"para_601"},{"text":"tive.” United States v. Playboy Ent. Grp., 529 U.S. 803, 823 (2000);","paragraph_id":"para_602"},{"text":"Grady, 18 F.4th at 1286.","paragraph_id":"para_603"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 22 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_604"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 23","paragraph_id":"para_605"},{"text":"Here, Alabama could employ less restrictive alternatives to","paragraph_id":"para_606"},{"text":"accomplish its goals. Henry suggests five different ways Alabama","paragraph_id":"para_607"},{"text":"could more narrowly tailor its statute: by holding individualized","paragraph_id":"para_608"},{"text":"hearings to assess a parent’s fitness, by allowing residence under","paragraph_id":"para_609"},{"text":"certain conditions (such as the presence of a qualified caregiver or","paragraph_id":"para_610"},{"text":"ongoing supervision by the Alabama Department of Human Re-","paragraph_id":"para_611"},{"text":"sources), by including fewer qualifying offenses, by time-limiting","paragraph_id":"para_612"},{"text":"its law, or by providing criteria for reinstatement into the home","paragraph_id":"para_613"},{"text":"(like completion of a treatment program).","paragraph_id":"para_614"},{"text":"Henry focuses primarily on the alternative that Alabama","paragraph_id":"para_615"},{"text":"could offer the opportunity for judicial review and individualized","paragraph_id":"para_616"},{"text":"relief, so we do, too. But other alternatives Henry suggests are also","paragraph_id":"para_617"},{"text":"viable—like allowing residence with the presence of a qualified","paragraph_id":"para_618"},{"text":"caregiver. So are more narrowly tailored alternatives Henry","paragraph_id":"para_619"},{"text":"doesn’t suggest—like a rebuttable presumption, or some combina-","paragraph_id":"para_620"},{"text":"tion of the other suggestions.","paragraph_id":"para_621"},{"text":"This case doesn’t require us to decide the best alternative; it","paragraph_id":"para_622"},{"text":"requires us to determine only whether viable more narrowly tai-","paragraph_id":"para_623"},{"text":"lored alternatives exist. They do.","paragraph_id":"para_624"},{"text":"The Act prevents covered offenders from living with their","paragraph_id":"para_625"},{"text":"children “regardless of the opinion of experts, lay persons, and the","paragraph_id":"para_626"},{"text":"trial court that the registered sex offender does not pose a threat to","paragraph_id":"para_627"},{"text":"the child.” K.E.W. v. T.W.E., 990 So. 2d 375, 381 (Ala. Civ. App.","paragraph_id":"para_628"},{"text":"2007). So if Henry filed suit to prove his fitness as a parent, the Act","paragraph_id":"para_629"},{"text":"would foreclose the claim and forbid the judge from considering","paragraph_id":"para_630"},{"text":"any evidence on the matter.","paragraph_id":"para_631"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 23 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_632"},{"text":"24 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_633"},{"text":"But Henry has developed evidence that a person’s likelihood","paragraph_id":"para_634"},{"text":"of recidivism declines substantially when we account for certain","paragraph_id":"para_635"},{"text":"factors and that an individualized review can offer the most accu-","paragraph_id":"para_636"},{"text":"rate assessment of the danger a particular person may pose to their","paragraph_id":"para_637"},{"text":"child.5 Plus, generally, “parents are constitutionally entitled to a","paragraph_id":"para_638"},{"text":"hearing on their fitness before their children are removed from","paragraph_id":"para_639"},{"text":"their custody.” Stanley, 405 U.S. at 658; cf. Doe v. Kearney, 329 F.3d","paragraph_id":"para_640"},{"text":"1286, 1295 (11th Cir. 2003) (“[A] state may not remove a child from","paragraph_id":"para_641"},{"text":"parental custody without judicial authorization unless there is","paragraph_id":"para_642"},{"text":"probable cause to believe the child is threatened with imminent","paragraph_id":"para_643"},{"text":"harm.”). So Henry has proffered a plausible less restrictive alterna-","paragraph_id":"para_644"},{"text":"tive, see ACLU, 521 U.S. at 874: individualized hearings.","paragraph_id":"para_645"},{"text":"Alabama suggests that, by proposing an individualized hear-","paragraph_id":"para_646"},{"text":"ing, Henry seeks only “procedural due process” protection. Not","paragraph_id":"para_647"},{"text":"so. Henry doesn’t contest the “constitutional adequacy of [state]","paragraph_id":"para_648"},{"text":"procedures,” Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 (1976), like","paragraph_id":"para_649"},{"text":"5 Alabama also hasn’t shown that the future dangerousness of a person con-","paragraph_id":"para_650"},{"text":"victed of a non-contact offense is the same as, or even similar to, the future","paragraph_id":"para_651"},{"text":"dangerousness of a person who has committed a contact offense. So limiting","paragraph_id":"para_652"},{"text":"the list of qualifying crimes to contact offenses or a sub-category of contact","paragraph_id":"para_653"},{"text":"offenses may offer another viable more narrowly tailored alternative. Even","paragraph_id":"para_654"},{"text":"so, Alabama would have to show that people convicted of contact offenses are","paragraph_id":"para_655"},{"text":"forever so likely to reoffend (or are otherwise overwhelmingly dangerous to","paragraph_id":"para_656"},{"text":"their children physically or mentally) that prohibiting them to reside with their","paragraph_id":"para_657"},{"text":"own children is a narrowly tailored way to further the state’s compelling in-","paragraph_id":"para_658"},{"text":"terest in protecting children. But that information is not currently before us","paragraph_id":"para_659"},{"text":"because we consider only Henry’s as-applied challenge. And Henry’s as-ap-","paragraph_id":"para_660"},{"text":"plied class consists of only those who have committed only non-contact of-","paragraph_id":"para_661"},{"text":"fenses.","paragraph_id":"para_662"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 24 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_663"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 25","paragraph_id":"para_664"},{"text":"when a person challenges the acceptability of post-deprivation","paragraph_id":"para_665"},{"text":"hearings, id. at 349; the applicable standard of proof, Santosky, 455","paragraph_id":"para_666"},{"text":"U.S. at 769–70; or the lack of appointed counsel, Lassiter v. Dep’t of","paragraph_id":"para_667"},{"text":"Soc. Servs., 452 U.S. 18, 31–32 (1981). Instead, Henry’s claim sounds","paragraph_id":"para_668"},{"text":"in substantive due process.","paragraph_id":"para_669"},{"text":"He raises the opportunity for individualized relief only to","paragraph_id":"para_670"},{"text":"show a problem with Alabama’s tailoring: there isn’t an “ade-","paragraph_id":"para_671"},{"text":"qua[te] . . . ‘fit’ between the classification and the policy that the","paragraph_id":"para_672"},{"text":"classification serves.” Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110, 121","paragraph_id":"para_673"},{"text":"(1989). That the less restrictive alternative is more procedure is","paragraph_id":"para_674"},{"text":"immaterial.","paragraph_id":"para_675"},{"text":"The Supreme Court has recognized that certain procedural","paragraph_id":"para_676"},{"text":"rules may satisfy substantive due process by furthering a compel-","paragraph_id":"para_677"},{"text":"ling state interest. See, e.g., Cruzan ex rel. Cruzan v. Dir., Mo. Dep’t of","paragraph_id":"para_678"},{"text":"Health, 497 U.S. 261, 280–85 (1990) (concluding Missouri could re-","paragraph_id":"para_679"},{"text":"quire clear and convincing evidence of a patient’s intent before dis-","paragraph_id":"para_680"},{"text":"continuing nutrition and hydration because such a requirement","paragraph_id":"para_681"},{"text":"permissibly furthers the state’s interest in safeguarding the patient’s","paragraph_id":"para_682"},{"text":"wishes and preserving life); United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739,","paragraph_id":"para_683"},{"text":"750–51 (1987) (holding the Bail Reform Act’s restriction of physical","paragraph_id":"para_684"},{"text":"liberty was justified by the “careful delineation of the circum-","paragraph_id":"para_685"},{"text":"stances” in and the procedures by which one could be detained be-","paragraph_id":"para_686"},{"text":"fore trial, furthering the government’s interest in abating “an iden-","paragraph_id":"para_687"},{"text":"tified and articulable threat to an individual or the community”).","paragraph_id":"para_688"},{"text":"At bottom, claims that a statute is unconstitutional as applied to a","paragraph_id":"para_689"},{"text":"plaintiff—because the plaintiff “is not likely to be currently","paragraph_id":"para_690"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 25 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_691"},{"text":"26 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_692"},{"text":"dangerous”—“‘must ultimately be analyzed’ in terms of substan-","paragraph_id":"para_693"},{"text":"tive, not procedural, due process,” at least if, as is the case here,","paragraph_id":"para_694"},{"text":"dangerousness is not already “relevant under the statutory","paragraph_id":"para_695"},{"text":"scheme.” Conn. Dep’t of Pub. Safety v. Doe, 538 U.S. 1, 7–8 (2003)","paragraph_id":"para_696"},{"text":"(quoting Michael H., 491 U.S. at 121); see also Cleveland Bd. of Educ.","paragraph_id":"para_697"},{"text":"v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632, 648–50 (1974) (explaining how an irrebut-","paragraph_id":"para_698"},{"text":"table presumption can violate substantive-due-process rights).","paragraph_id":"para_699"},{"text":"Alabama disputes the viability of individualized hearings. It","paragraph_id":"para_700"},{"text":"contends that no expert tool can establish with a reasonable degree","paragraph_id":"para_701"},{"text":"of scientific accuracy whether an offender poses a risk to their child.","paragraph_id":"para_702"},{"text":"In Alabama’s view, individualized determinations could never ad-","paragraph_id":"para_703"},{"text":"vance its compelling interest as effectively as its current statutory","paragraph_id":"para_704"},{"text":"scheme because some future offenders may slip through the cracks","paragraph_id":"para_705"},{"text":"of any individualized process. But Alabama has failed to introduce","paragraph_id":"para_706"},{"text":"evidence that satisfies its burden of proving that the mere availabil-","paragraph_id":"para_707"},{"text":"ity of individualized relief will make its statutory scheme less effec-","paragraph_id":"para_708"},{"text":"tive. See Playboy Ent. Grp., 529 U.S. at 823; Grady, 18 F.4th at 1286.","paragraph_id":"para_709"},{"text":"That’s so for three reasons.","paragraph_id":"para_710"},{"text":"First, Alabama too narrowly defines the end to which it must","paragraph_id":"para_711"},{"text":"narrowly tailor its law. Alabama must advance “the physical and","paragraph_id":"para_712"},{"text":"psychological well-being” of all its children. Otto, 981 F.3d at 868","paragraph_id":"para_713"},{"text":"(citation omitted). Yet as we’ve noted, “the State registers no gain","paragraph_id":"para_714"},{"text":"towards its declared goals when it separates children from the cus-","paragraph_id":"para_715"},{"text":"tody of fit parents.” Stanley, 405 U.S. at 652. So if Henry, or any","paragraph_id":"para_716"},{"text":"other parent, “is a fit” one, then Alabama “spites its own articulated","paragraph_id":"para_717"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 26 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_718"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 27","paragraph_id":"para_719"},{"text":"goals when it needlessly separates him from his family.” Id. at 652–","paragraph_id":"para_720"},{"text":"53.","paragraph_id":"para_721"},{"text":"In turn, the most effective means of pursuing Alabama’s","paragraph_id":"para_722"},{"text":"stated goal is the one that maximizes the number of children who","paragraph_id":"para_723"},{"text":"can remain with fit parents while minimizing the number of chil-","paragraph_id":"para_724"},{"text":"dren who may be placed with unfit ones. On this rubric, permitting","paragraph_id":"para_725"},{"text":"some form of individualized relief comports more effectively with","paragraph_id":"para_726"},{"text":"advancing the State’s interests than does a categorical rule. See id.","paragraph_id":"para_727"},{"text":"at 655 (“Given the opportunity to make his case, Stanley may have","paragraph_id":"para_728"},{"text":"been seen to be deserving of custody of his offspring. Had this been","paragraph_id":"para_729"},{"text":"so, the State’s statutory policy would have been furthered by leav-","paragraph_id":"para_730"},{"text":"ing custody in him.”). And that’s especially so when, as we discuss","paragraph_id":"para_731"},{"text":"in the second point, the Act doesn’t even ensure the safety of af-","paragraph_id":"para_732"},{"text":"fected children.","paragraph_id":"para_733"},{"text":"“[W]hen . . . the procedure forecloses the determinative is-","paragraph_id":"para_734"},{"text":"sues of competence and care, when it explicitly disdains present re-","paragraph_id":"para_735"},{"text":"alities in deference to past formalities, it needlessly risks running","paragraph_id":"para_736"},{"text":"roughshod over the important interests of both parent and child.”","paragraph_id":"para_737"},{"text":"Id. at 657. “The State’s interest in caring for [Henry’s] children is","paragraph_id":"para_738"},{"text":"de minimis if [Henry] is shown to be a fit father.” See id. at 657–58.","paragraph_id":"para_739"},{"text":"And the advantage of the convenience of an irrebuttable presump-","paragraph_id":"para_740"},{"text":"tion “is insufficient to justify refusing a father a hearing when the","paragraph_id":"para_741"},{"text":"issue at stake is the dismemberment of his family.” Id. at 658.","paragraph_id":"para_742"},{"text":"Second, Alabama fails to show how the opportunity for in-","paragraph_id":"para_743"},{"text":"dividualized adjudications will make its statutory scheme less effec-","paragraph_id":"para_744"},{"text":"tive, given the law’s underinclusiveness. As we’ve noted, the Act","paragraph_id":"para_745"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 27 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_746"},{"text":"28 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_747"},{"text":"permits even the worst covered offenders periods of unsupervised","paragraph_id":"para_748"},{"text":"access to their children.6 We understand those visitation rights as","paragraph_id":"para_749"},{"text":"an attempt to balance the competing interests at stake in this diffi-","paragraph_id":"para_750"},{"text":"cult area of family law. But even so, Alabama has not adduced ev-","paragraph_id":"para_751"},{"text":"idence that employing a scheme that permits some individualized","paragraph_id":"para_752"},{"text":"determinations that a parent is fit to reside with their child would","paragraph_id":"para_753"},{"text":"undermine its interests.","paragraph_id":"para_754"},{"text":"For starters, Alabama has not offered evidence on how likely","paragraph_id":"para_755"},{"text":"its trial courts are to err in making individualized determinations.","paragraph_id":"para_756"},{"text":"Nor has it shown that the number of future offenders who may slip","paragraph_id":"para_757"},{"text":"through the cracks of an alternative scheme with individualized re-","paragraph_id":"para_758"},{"text":"lief would be greater than the number of those who would harm","paragraph_id":"para_759"},{"text":"their children under the Act’s current operation. And that seems","paragraph_id":"para_760"},{"text":"especially unlikely if the alternative scheme eliminates the Act’s","paragraph_id":"para_761"},{"text":"current underinclusivity and is narrowly tailored to cover those","paragraph_id":"para_762"},{"text":"who either decline their opportunity for individualized relief, see","paragraph_id":"para_763"},{"text":"Lehr v. Robertson, 463 U.S. 248, 264–65 (1983), or, after petitioning","paragraph_id":"para_764"},{"text":"for relief, are adjudicated to be dangerous, see Stanley, 405 U.S. at","paragraph_id":"para_765"},{"text":"654–55.","paragraph_id":"para_766"},{"text":"After all, to police the statute’s current underinclusiveness,","paragraph_id":"para_767"},{"text":"the “legislature obviously relie[s] heavily on the understanding that","paragraph_id":"para_768"},{"text":"trial courts” will “restrict the visitation rights of a parent who poses","paragraph_id":"para_769"},{"text":"a danger of sexually abusing a child.” S.A.N., 995 So. 2d at 179. So","paragraph_id":"para_770"},{"text":"6 This is a reason why another alternative—requiring the presence of a quali-","paragraph_id":"para_771"},{"text":"fied caretaker at all times—is another more effective, more narrowly tailored","paragraph_id":"para_772"},{"text":"viable alternative to the Act.","paragraph_id":"para_773"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 28 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_774"},{"text":"24-10139 Opinion of the Court 29","paragraph_id":"para_775"},{"text":"the State can’t reasonably contend that individualized adjudica-","paragraph_id":"para_776"},{"text":"tions are so often wrong that they seriously threaten the Act’s ef-","paragraph_id":"para_777"},{"text":"fectiveness; it already relies on them. Without more evidence, we","paragraph_id":"para_778"},{"text":"can’t conclude that a genuine dispute of material fact exists on","paragraph_id":"para_779"},{"text":"whether Henry’s proffered alternatives are less effective.","paragraph_id":"para_780"},{"text":"Third, and relatedly, to the best of our knowledge, every","paragraph_id":"para_781"},{"text":"other state in the country gives offenders the chance to prove that","paragraph_id":"para_782"},{"text":"they do not pose a danger to their child or that it is in the child’s","paragraph_id":"para_783"},{"text":"best interest to live with them. Indeed, in the district-court pro-","paragraph_id":"para_784"},{"text":"ceedings, both the parties and the district court were “unaware of","paragraph_id":"para_785"},{"text":"any statute enacted by another state substantially similar to [the","paragraph_id":"para_786"},{"text":"Law].” Henry, 711 F. Supp. 3d at 1305.","paragraph_id":"para_787"},{"text":"That fact is important to the analysis of less restrictive alter-","paragraph_id":"para_788"},{"text":"natives. If the Act is an outlier, we can more easily conclude that","paragraph_id":"para_789"},{"text":"Henry successfully proffered a viable less restrictive alternative. See","paragraph_id":"para_790"},{"text":"Poe v. Ullman, 367 U.S. 497, 554 (1961) (Harlan, J., dissenting)","paragraph_id":"para_791"},{"text":"(“[C]onclusive, in my view, is the utter novelty of this enact-","paragraph_id":"para_792"},{"text":"ment.”); cf. Packingham v. North Carolina, 582 U.S. 98, 108 (2017) (“It","paragraph_id":"para_793"},{"text":"is instructive that no case or holding of this Court has approved of","paragraph_id":"para_794"},{"text":"a statute as broad in its reach.”). The Supreme Court has con-","paragraph_id":"para_795"},{"text":"firmed that other states’ practices may show that a given measure","paragraph_id":"para_796"},{"text":"has “already proven effective” in advancing the State’s interests.","paragraph_id":"para_797"},{"text":"TikTok, 145 S. Ct. at 71; see McCullen v. Coakley, 573 U.S. 464, 490–","paragraph_id":"para_798"},{"text":"494 (2014) (concluding a state law burdened more speech than nec-","paragraph_id":"para_799"},{"text":"essary where it had not considered less restrictive measures suc-","paragraph_id":"para_800"},{"text":"cessfully adopted by other jurisdictions).","paragraph_id":"para_801"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 29 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_802"},{"text":"30 Opinion of the Court 24-10139","paragraph_id":"para_803"},{"text":"In sum, because Section 15-20A-11(d)(4) is both overinclu-","paragraph_id":"para_804"},{"text":"sive and underinclusive, and because less restrictive alternatives are","paragraph_id":"para_805"},{"text":"plausibly at least just as effective, the law as applied to Henry, a","paragraph_id":"para_806"},{"text":"non-contact offender, fails strict scrutiny. See In re Amanda D., 811","paragraph_id":"para_807"},{"text":"N.E.2d at 1238, 1241–48 (holding unconstitutional a statute that","paragraph_id":"para_808"},{"text":"terminated parental rights based solely on the fact that the parent","paragraph_id":"para_809"},{"text":"“was previously convicted of aggravated battery of a child”).","paragraph_id":"para_810"},{"text":"IV. Conclusion","paragraph_id":"para_811"},{"text":"For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the Act fails","paragraph_id":"para_812"},{"text":"strict scrutiny as applied to Henry. We therefore affirm the district","paragraph_id":"para_813"},{"text":"court’s ruling as applied to Henry.","paragraph_id":"para_814"},{"text":"AFFIRMED AS APPLIED TO HENRY.","paragraph_id":"para_815"},{"text":"USCA11 Case: 24-10139 Document: 125-1 Date Filed: 09/29/2026 Page: 30 of 30","paragraph_id":"para_816"}],"word_count":8006,"cites":["477\nU.S. 317","477 U.S. 242","521 U.S. 702","523 U.S. 833","507 U.S. 292","508 U.S. 307","348 U.S. 483","458 U.S. 747","405 U.S. 645","455\nU.S. 745","564 U.S. 786","602 U.S. 899","434 U.S. 374","473 U.S. 432","575 U.S. 433","570\nU.S. 387","576 U.S. 155","536 U.S. 765","512 U.S. 43","604 U.S. 56","521 U.S. 844","364 U.S. 479","529 U.S. 803","424 U.S. 319","452 U.S. 18","491 U.S. 110","497 U.S. 261","481 U.S. 739","538 U.S. 1","414 U.S. 632","463 U.S. 248","367 U.S. 497","582 U.S. 98","573 U.S. 464","135 F.4th 1271","150 F.4th 1370","180 F.4th 1294","936 F.3d 1227","358 F.3d 804","981 F.3d 854","452 F.3d 991","769 F.3d 1221","785 F.3d 48","685 F.3d 404","744 F.2d 1452","18\nF.4th 1275","797 F.3d 934","329 F.3d\n1286"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"ba58f75e420c927d214164fb3eb8a3d4abc4efb448edd4ce4080df09129e8093","source_url":"http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202410139.op2.pdf","fetched_at":"2026-10-01T14:56:10.471+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29","neighbors":[{"id":"us:ca11-25-13298-2026-10-19","name":"Pen American Center, Inc. v. Kevin Adams","decided":"2026-10-19","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-25-13298-2026-10-19","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-25-13298-2026-10-19","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-25-13298-2026-10-19"},{"id":"us:ca11-25-12436-2026-10-15","name":"NetChoice v. Attorney General, State of Georgia","decided":"2026-10-15","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-25-12436-2026-10-15","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-25-12436-2026-10-15","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-25-12436-2026-10-15"},{"id":"us:ca11-25-11881-2026-10-14","name":"Computer & Communications Industry Association v. Attorney General, State of Florida","decided":"2026-10-14","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-25-11881-2026-10-14","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-25-11881-2026-10-14","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-25-11881-2026-10-14"},{"id":"us:ca11-21-14144-2026-10-14","name":"United States v. Friell Johnson","decided":"2026-10-14","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-21-14144-2026-10-14","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-21-14144-2026-10-14","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-21-14144-2026-10-14"},{"id":"us:ca11-24-10084-2026-10-13","name":"Rani Bolton v. Inland Fresh Seafood Corporation of America, Inc.","decided":"2026-10-13","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-24-10084-2026-10-13","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-24-10084-2026-10-13","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-24-10084-2026-10-13"},{"id":"us:ca11-21-14252-2026-10-13","name":"United States v. Terrance Louis","decided":"2026-10-13","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-21-14252-2026-10-13","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-21-14252-2026-10-13","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-21-14252-2026-10-13"},{"id":"us:ca11-24-13543-2026-10-09","name":"Steven W. Hernandez v. Florida Board of Bar Examiners","decided":"2026-10-09","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-24-13543-2026-10-09","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-24-13543-2026-10-09","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-24-13543-2026-10-09"},{"id":"us:ca11-23-13326-2026-10-08","name":"United States v. Antonio Brown","decided":"2026-10-08","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-23-13326-2026-10-08","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-23-13326-2026-10-08","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-23-13326-2026-10-08"},{"id":"us:ca11-23-13262-2026-10-08","name":"United States v. Junior Xavier Chirino-Lovera","decided":"2026-10-08","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-23-13262-2026-10-08","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-23-13262-2026-10-08","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-23-13262-2026-10-08"},{"id":"us:ca11-23-10062-2026-10-07","name":"Curtrina Martin v. USA","decided":"2026-10-07","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-23-10062-2026-10-07","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-23-10062-2026-10-07","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-23-10062-2026-10-07"}],"verification":{"stored_sha256":"ba58f75e420c927d214164fb3eb8a3d4abc4efb448edd4ce4080df09129e8093","recomputed_sha256":"ba58f75e420c927d214164fb3eb8a3d4abc4efb448edd4ce4080df09129e8093","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-25T12:38:10.018Z"}},"hash":"sha256:840cda5f5754650a857b042873290ed9df0aae5697918acb21eabbb3d390cca9","version":"legal-2026-10-25","expires":"2026-10-26T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-25+legal-2026-10-25+2026-10-25T12:13:04","content_hash":"sha256:840cda5f5754650a857b042873290ed9df0aae5697918acb21eabbb3d390cca9","revalidate_after":"2026-10-25T13:38:10.685Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/praxis/ca11-24-10139-2026-09-29","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-5341a9e37f18499eaed4c9eb005779ca","response_hash":"sha256:840cda5f5754650a857b042873290ed9df0aae5697918acb21eabbb3d390cca9"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-03T11:42:46.632Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us%3Aca11-24-10139-2026-09-29&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":34324}}