Missouri bill aimed at predators also lifts ban on gay sex

~ Sponsor Scott Lipke said the repeal was "no policy statement" because the law was unenforceable.

When Rep. Scott Lipke, R-Jackson, sponsored a tough new law aimed at sexual predators who target children and young teens, he included something extra that hasn't received much notice -- the bill repeals Missouri's law banning consensual gay sex.

The law is unenforceable because of a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, but Missouri lawmakers haven't always acted quickly to repeal provisions of state law that violated high court rulings. For example, it wasn't until 1976 -- 22 years after the Brown v. Board of Education ruling -- that the Missouri Legislature put a constitutional amendment on the ballot allowing voters to repeal the section requiring segregated schools.

Supporters of the change praised it as a symbolic victory that could have a lasting impact on the rights of gays and lesbians. Lipke, however, said they were reading far more into the repeal than he intended.

"Our laws are meant to put people on notice of what rules to live by," he said. "There is no sense to have things on the books that don't carry any weight. It is no policy statement whatsoever."

The bill, commonly called Jessica's Law, is awaiting approval from Gov. Matt Blunt. The provisions aimed at predators include lifetime monitoring for some sex offenders after they are released from prison, longer sentences for sex crimes against children and new definitions that reflect the way the Internet is being used by some to entice children.

"This is one of the governor's top priorities and one we are very pleased to see passed," said Jessica Robinson, press secretary for Blunt.

No date has been set for signing the bill, Robinson said. Blunt hasn't taken a stand on whether he approves of the repeal of the law against gay sex, she said.

The Missouri law being changed to repeal the ban is the sexual misconduct law. Until the 2003 high court ruling in a case out of Texas, the law imposed a penalty of up to one year in jail for sexual activities between people of the same gender.

The ruling, based on the court's interpretation of privacy rights, invalidated Missouri's law, but removing the language from the statutes requires legislative action. Lipke included the repeal from the first version of the bill he filed; the state Senate at first rejected that move but agreed to the repeal during a vote on the final version of the legislation.

"It is a clearly outdated, discriminatory law that the Supreme Court rightfully overturned," said Julie Brueggemann, director of PROMO, a statewide gay and lesbian rights group. "Missouri legislators did the right thing and complied with the Supreme Court decision."

The law, despite being unenforceable, has been cited as one reason for denying a foster parenting application from a Kansas City woman. The Missouri Department of Social Services initially turned down the request of Lisa Johnston to be a foster parent for a special-needs child. A Jackson County judge overturned the department's decision, but the ruling is being appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court.

No date has been set for arguments in Johnston's case, but enactment of a repeal will deny lawyers for the state one of their main arguments, Brueggemann said.

"Even though the sexual misconduct language was deemed unconstitutional in 2003, it is still being used to discriminate against gays and lesbians," she said. "It is a hugely important change."

The repeal was enacted by a Republican-controlled legislature that just two years ago sent voters a state constitutional amendment barring homosexuals from marrying. Charles Stadtlander, president of the St. Louis chapter of the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay GOP group, said he sees some irony in the two actions.

The change actually represents the best of the Republican principle of limited interference in people's lives, Stadtlander said. And beyond that, it is symbolically important that it was included in the bill establishing stronger penalties for sexual predators.

"It is about time that legislators take steps to acknowledge that consensual sex between two same-sex people is not the same as being a sexual predator," he said.

rkeller@semissourian.com

335-6611, extension 126