Antrim v. Hoy
2:19-cv-00396
E.D. Wis.Mar 11, 2025Background
- Plaintiff, Alton Antrim, is a twice-convicted child sex offender subject to lifetime GPS monitoring under Wisconsin Statute § 301.48(2)(a)(7).
- Antrim is no longer under criminal supervision, but must still wear the GPS ankle monitor as required by law.
- He brought a class action, representing approximately 680 similarly situated individuals, challenging the constitutionality of this monitoring under the Fourth Amendment.
- The case was narrowed over time, leaving only the Fourth Amendment claim after prior dismissal of other claims.
- Seventh Circuit precedent (notably Belleau v. Wall and Braam v. Carr) had already upheld similar statutes and rejected attempts at preliminary injunction.
- At summary judgment, the district court was asked to consider whether Antrim's circumstances were distinguishable from existing precedent and thus entitled to relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constitutionality of lifetime GPS monitoring | Monitoring violates the Fourth Amendment as applied to Antrim | Existing precedent forecloses such a challenge | Monitoring is reasonable; precedent applies |
| Applicability of Belleau v. Wall/Braam v. Carr | Belleau factually distinguishable; statutory subsection differs | Facts and reasoning in Belleau/Braam govern this case | No material distinction; precedent governs |
| Overbreadth of statute | Statute applies too broadly to low-risk offenders | Antrim must show unconstitutionality as applied to himself | Overbreadth arguments rejected in this context |
| Role of social science research | Social science undermines the need/effectiveness of monitoring | Courts should not second-guess legislative policy choices | Not a basis for relief; Court follows precedent |
Key Cases Cited
- Belleau v. Wall, 811 F.3d 929 (7th Cir. 2016) (upheld constitutionality of Wisconsin’s GPS monitoring for sex offenders as reasonable under the Fourth Amendment)
- Grady v. North Carolina, 575 U.S. 306 (2015) (held GPS monitoring of sex offenders is a search but can be reasonable under the Fourth Amendment)
- Braam v. Carr, 37 F.4th 1269 (7th Cir. 2022) (applied Belleau and reaffirmed the reasonableness of Wisconsin’s GPS monitoring)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (party seeking summary judgment bears the burden of showing no genuine issue of material fact)