Court of Appeals strikes down Minnesota’s revenge porn law

MINNEAPOLIS — Minnesota’s law against revenge porn is unconstitutional and infringes on First Amendment rights, the state Court of Appeals ruled Monday as it reversed the conviction of a man who circulated explicit photos of a former girlfriend.

The court ruled that the state law was such a broad violation of First Amendment free-speech rights that it couldn’t be fixed by a ruling limiting its scope.

According to court filings, Michael Anthony Casillas used the victim’s passwords to access her accounts after their relationship ended to obtain sexual photos and videos of her, then threatened to release them. She later received a screenshot from one explicit video that had been sent to 44 recipients and posted online.

A Dakota County judge rejected defendant Casillas’ First Amendment challenge to the state law and sentenced him to 23 months in prison.

The three-judge appeals panel called Casillas’ conduct “abhorrent,” and said they recognized that nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images can cause significant harm.

“The state legitimately seeks to punish that conduct,” they wrote. “But the state cannot do so under a statute that is written too broadly and therefore violates the First Amendment.”

In throwing out his conviction, Judges Michelle Larkin, Peter Reyes and Randall Slieter said the state’s revenge porn statute has the potential to cover conduct that is constitutionally protected, such as sharing images that appear in publicly accessible media with the consent of the people depicted.