“The Supreme Court’s Mixed Signals in Packingham” is the title of a thoughtful comment by Bidish Sarma analyzing the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Packingham v. North Carolina, recently published on the American Constitution Society website. (An early analysis of the Packingham decision by Wayne Logan appeared on this site on June 20.) Mr. Sarma proposes that “the time has come to ask whether society’s ‘war’ on sex offenders who have already completed criminal sentences has gone too far.” While the Packingham holding is confined to the First Amendment issues raised by North Carolina’s broad restrictions on access to “an astounding range of websites (including news websites, WebMD and Amazon),” Sarma singles out a sentence in Justice Kennedy’s opinion suggesting a broader underlying concern about the constitutionality of sex offender consequences: Justice Kennedy’s opinion hints that the justices in fact harbor concerns. In a parenthetical note, the decision referred to “the troubling fact that the law imposes severe restrictions on persons who already have served their sentence and are no longer subject to the supervision of the criminal justice system,” and observed that this fact is “not an issue before the Court.”
Read moreTag: Sarma
Restoration of Rights Project (RRP)
- Loss & restoration of civil/firearms rights
- Pardon policy & practice
- Expungement, sealing & other record relief
- Criminal record in employment, licensing & housing
Restoration of Firearm Rights After Conviction: A National Survey and Recommendations for Reform (Dec. 2025)

About the Restoration of Rights Project
The Restoration of Rights Project (RRP) is a project of the Collateral Consequences Resource Center in partnership with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, National Legal Aid & Defender Association, National HIRE Network, Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, and Paper Prisons Initiative. Launched in 2017, the RRP is an online resource containing detailed state-by-state analyses of the law and practice in each U.S. jurisdiction relating to restoration of rights and status following arrest or conviction. Jurisdictional “profiles” cover areas such as loss and restoration of civil rights and firearms rights, judicial and executive mechanisms for avoiding or mitigating collateral consequences, and provisions addressing non-discrimination in employment, licensing, and housing. In addition to the jurisdictional profiles, RRP materials include a set of 50-state comparison charts that make it possible to see national patterns in restoration laws and policies. Short “postcard” summaries of the law in each state serve as a gateway to the more detailed information in the profiles, and provide a snapshot of applicable law in each state.
Originally published in 2006 by CCRC Executive Director Margaret Love, the research in the RRP has been kept up to date and substantially expanded over the years, and it is summarized in an appendix to the treatise on collateral consequences published jointly by NACDL and Thompson Reuters (West). It is intended as a resource for practitioners in all phases of the criminal justice system, for courts, for civil practitioners assisting clients whose court-imposed sentence has exposed them to additional civil penalties, for policymakers and advocates interested in reentry and reintegration of convicted persons, and for the millions of Americans with a criminal record who are seeking to put their past behind them.
These resources may be republished as long as appropriate attribution is given to the RRP as its source.




