60 Cal.4th 1019 (2015)
Blanket enforcement of Jessica’s Law’s 2,000-foot rule on San Diego parolees was unconstitutional because it drove homelessness without protecting children.
Good law. Still followed. Later cases may have narrowed it — see Scope. Final word on that state’s own law and constitution — in that state only.
California’s Jessica’s Law (Penal Code § 3003.5(b)) barred registrants from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park. The corrections department enforced it as a blanket parole condition for every registered parolee in San Diego County. Parolees challenged it through habeas petitions.
The court unanimously held that blanket enforcement was unconstitutional as applied to them. The evidence showed it caused widespread homelessness, cut parolees off from treatment and services and made supervision harder, while bearing no rational relationship to protecting children. That violated their basic right to be free of unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive official action.
Taylor is the leading case weighing what residency rules actually do in practice, not just what they are meant to do. It is why California parole residency restrictions are now imposed case by case rather than across the board.
The statute was not struck down on its face. Parole authorities may still impose residency restrictions case by case when they are tied to the individual parolee.
Last verified against the sources above on September 30, 2026.
These are plain-language summaries of court decisions, written for general education. A ruling binds only the courts beneath the court that issued it, later decisions and new laws can change what it means, and how it applies to any one person depends on facts a summary cannot capture. Read the opinion itself, and talk to a lawyer licensed in your state before relying on any case. This page is not legal advice.