Karlin v. Stanford Parole Condition Appeal
The Clinic represented client Daniel Karlin before New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals, in a First Amendment challenge to a parole condition which infringed on Karlin's First Amendment rights. The condition mandated that Karlin, who was convicted of sex-related crimes as a teenager, not view, possess, or access any material with any depiction of nudity or sexual activity of any kind, for any reason. It barred Karlin from possessing or viewing a wide range of material protected by the First Amendment – for example, the Terminator’s iconic opening scene, Michelangelo’s David sculpture, Gustav Klimt’s Mother and Child painting, and most late-night television.
On appeal, the Clinic argued that, although Karlin, as a parolee and a registered sex offender, is subject to myriad constraints on his liberty, these restrictions have a limit. Given its breadth and lack of relationship to any legitimate penological interest, the parole condition Karlin challenged far surpassed any permissible limitations on his First Amendment rights.
After briefing by the Clinic, the State of New York, and amicus curiae the New York Civil Liberties Union, as well as a lengthy oral argument by Stanton Fellow Christina Neitzey, the Court of Appeals ultimately denied Karlin's appeal and affirmed the lower court. In its July 2024 decision, the Court avoided the First Amendment and constitutional standard of review issues at the heart of the challenge, instead taking a narrow view of the scope of the parole condition Karlin challenged.
Information on this page is provided for archival purposes. All newly created PDFs on this website are accessible. For an accommodation for PDFs on this page, please contact law-web-ada@cornell.edu.