State of Iowa v. Lloyd Aschbrenner, 926 N.W.2d 240

Lloyd Aschbrenner pled guilty in 2007 to lascivious acts with a child and was placed on Iowa's sex offender registry; later convictions extended his registration period.
In 2009 Iowa amended chapter 692A to require registered sex offenders to provide and update “Internet identifiers” (e.g., social media names, email/instant‑message identifiers) to the local sheriff within five business days; passwords are not required.
In 2017 DCI investigators learned Aschbrenner used a Facebook account under an alias and charged him with a registry violation for failing to report that Internet identifier.
Aschbrenner moved to dismiss arguing the 2009 amendment (1) violated the Ex Post Facto Clauses when applied retroactively and (2) violated federal and state free speech protections (First Amendment and Iowa Const. art. I, § 7); the district court denied the motion and convicted him after a stipulated bench trial.
The Iowa Supreme Court retained the appeal and reviewed de novo whether the Internet‑identifier reporting requirement is punitive (ex post facto) and whether it burdens protected speech.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether adding Internet‑identifier reporting to chapter 692A (2009 amendment) is punitive and thus violates Ex Post Facto Clauses when applied to an offender convicted before the amendment	Aschbrenner: the expanded reporting is punitive in purpose/effect (relying on In re T.H.) and thus unconstitutional as retroactive punishment	State: the statute is remedial/public‑safety focused, nonpunitive; Seering and federal authority support that registration requirements are civil, not punishment	Held: statute is nonpunitive as applied to adult offenders; In re T.H. is limited to juveniles; ex post facto challenge rejected
Whether the Internet‑identifier reporting requirement infringes freedom of speech/anonymous speech	Aschbrenner: requirement is vague/overbroad, chills anonymous speech, applies regardless of whether offense involved the Internet, and allows disclosure to public upon inquiry	State: requirement is content neutral, narrowly tailored to protect public safety, allows social‑media use, excludes passwords, permits several days and multiple reporting methods, and limits public disclosure to queries about specific identifiers	Held: law is content neutral and survives intermediate scrutiny as narrowly tailored to a significant government interest; First Amendment and Iowa Const. claims rejected

In re T.H., 913 N.W.2d 578 (Iowa 2018) (held juvenile registration punitive as applied to juveniles)
State v. Seering, 701 N.W.2d 655 (Iowa 2005) (held adult sex‑offender registration nonpunitive)
Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84 (2003) (Supreme Court decision treating Alaska’s registration scheme as nonpunitive)
Kennedy v. Mendoza‑Martinez, 372 U.S. 144 (1963) (Mendoza‑Martinez factors for determining punitive effect)
Doe v. Harris, 772 F.3d 563 (9th Cir. 2014) (struck down California’s internet‑reporting statute as overbroad/onerous)
Doe v. Shurtleff, 628 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2010) (upheld Utah’s internet identifier reporting requirement as nonpunitive)
Packingham v. North Carolina, 582 U.S. (2017) (recognized social media as important forum and invalidated a broad ban on sex offenders’ social‑media access)