Federal Court: Alabama Cannot Bar Parents From Living With Their Children Without Strict Scrutiny

A federal appeals court has issued a significant ruling in a case that originated in Tuscaloosa County, finding that all parents, including those with prior sex crime convictions, have a fundamental constitutional right to live with their children.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled Monday in Henry v. Sheriff of Tuscaloosa County, a case stemming from a lawsuit filed by a Tuscaloosa County man who pleaded guilty in 2013 to possessing child pornography.

The man, Bruce Henry, completed his prison sentence, married and fathered a son a few years ago. Because his conviction involved a child-related offense, Alabama's Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification Act permanently prohibits him from living with or conducting overnight visits with any minor, including his own child. The law provides no mechanism for relief or individualized review.

Get our free mobile app

The man sued the Tuscaloosa County Sheriff, the Tuscaloosa County District Attorney, and the Alabama Attorney General under federal civil rights law, seeking to block enforcement of the residency prohibition as it applied to his son.

The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama ruled in his favor, declaring the provision unconstitutional and issuing a sweeping injunction against its enforcement statewide. A three-judge panel of the Eleventh Circuit initially affirmed in part before the full court agreed to rehear the case.

In Monday's en banc ruling, meaning the full court heard the case rather than a three-judge panel, the Eleventh Circuit held that the right to live with one's children is a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, and that Alabama cannot strip that right from a class of parents because of past offenses without meeting the highest level of constitutional scrutiny. The court rejected Alabama's argument that certain categories of parents fall outside that protection.

"The State of Alabama says not all parents enjoy this right. It argues instead that entire classes of parents have no fundamental rights at all because they committed state-defined 'misconduct' years before their children were even born," Circuit Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum wrote. "But the Supreme Court and our history and tradition have spoken unambiguously: parents — even those who have committed state-defined 'misconduct' — enjoy the fundamental right to live with their children."

The court did not strike down the law outright. Instead, it sent the case back for further proceedings under strict scrutiny, requiring Alabama to demonstrate that the residency prohibition is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest, a high bar the state will now have to clear to enforce the restriction against the plaintiff.

The ruling has potential implications for how Alabama enforces its sex offender residency laws more broadly, though the court stopped short of issuing a universal ruling on the statute's constitutionality.

For more exclusive coverage of crime and courts in West Alabama, stay connected to the Tuscaloosa Thread.