In the Matter of the Welfare Of: A. J. B., Child.

Summary

The court held that Minnesota's stalking-by-mail provision is facially overbroad under the First Amendment and cannot be saved by judicial narrowing or severance. It also held that the mail-harassment statute is facially overbroad, but that its references to intending to "disturb" or "cause distress" may be severed, leaving a constitutionally valid prohibition on repeatedly sending communications with intent to abuse. The court reversed both delinquency adjudications and remanded the mail-harassment adjudication for reconsideration under the narrowed statute.