An Arizona federal judge has affirmed that requiring sex offenders to remain on the state’s registry for life does not infringe on their rights. This decision underscores the legality of the state’s lifetime registration mandate.

U.S. District Judge Stephen McNamee, based in Phoenix, ruled that the laws obligating sex offenders to continuously update their residence and online identifiers are constitutional. He emphasized the government’s authority in implementing these measures.

“Arizona has a significant governmental interest in protecting children and preventing sex offender recidivism,” McNamee stated in his judgment.

The ruling, issued on November 6, represents a significant triumph for supporters of the legislation, including Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen. Petersen heralded the judge’s decision as a “victory for every parent in Arizona.”

Petersen also took the opportunity to criticize his political opponent, state Attorney General Kris Mayes, whom he intends to oppose in the 2026 elections. He accused Mayes of neglecting her duty to defend the case and failing to protect Arizona communities.

“When the Attorney General didn’t defend Arizona’s public safety laws, we refused to allow the safety of our children to be jeopardized,” Petersen said. “This ruling makes clear that tracking convicted sex offenders is not only constitutional – it is necessary to protect families and prevent new victimization.”

The lawsuit was filed by an Arizona resident listed as “Level One” on the sex offender registry, denoting that he is of the lowest risk of three possible levels. The man, who was granted anonymity and thus referred to as John Doe, pleaded guilty in 2016 to several crimes, including attempted sexual conduct with a minor under 15.

Doe argued several of his constitutional rights have been violated by the laws, including his 14th Amendment right to due process. He argued that the lifetime registration requirement is unconstitutional, as he cannot contest the requirement, and that it is unnecessary as he poses a low risk of recidivism because he is a “Level One” offender.

McNamee dismissed this argument, noting that Doe already got to contest his status before he was convicted of his crimes.

Petersen and Arizona House Speaker Steve Montenegro intervened as defendants in the case when they filed a motion to intervene. The judge ruled in their favor, despite Doe’s claim that his First Amendment rights were violated because of his need to disclose his internet identifiers.

The defendants, McNamee said, “have met their burden of showing that Arizona’s internet identifier reporting requirements do not burden substantially more speech than necessary to further Arizona’s goal of protecting children and reducing sex offender recidivism.” Furthermore, the judge wrote, “Arizona’s internet identifier reporting requirements do not bar Doe from engaging in online discourse.”

According to Arizona Mirror, a related legal challenge is being considered in the state. Several people have sued after lawmakers in 2024 expanded the number of people posted to the state’s sex offender website and required sex offenders with children to disclose their children’s names and schools.