Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 777.0

529US3

Unit: $U56

[09-28-01 09:22:18] PAGES PGT: OPIN

702

JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES

Opinion of the Court

Inc., 511 U. S. 298, 304–307 (1994). Neither is there any in-
dication of retroactive purpose in the omission of an express
effective date from the statute. The omission simply remits
us to the general rule that when a statute has no effective
date, “absent a clear direction by Congress to the contrary,
[it] takes effect on the date of its enactment.” Gozlon-
Peretz, 498 U. S., at 404.4

Nor, ﬁnally, has Congress given us anything expressly
identifying the relevant conduct in a way that would point
to retroactive intent.
It may well be that Congress, like the
Sixth Circuit, believed that § 3583(h) would naturally govern
sentencing proceedings for violations of supervised release
that took place after the statute’s enactment, simply because
the violation was the occasion for imposing the sanctions.5
But Congress gave us no clear indication to this effect, and
we have already rejected that theory; the relevant conduct
In sum, there being no contrary intent,
is the initial offense.
our longstanding presumption directs that § 3583(h) applies
only to cases in which that initial offense occurred after the
effective date of the amendment, September 13, 1994.

Given this conclusion, the case does not turn on whether
Johnson is worse off under § 3583(h) than he previously was
under § 3583(e)(3), as subsection (h) does not apply, and the
ex post facto question does not arise. The case turns, in-

4 Indeed, the Sentencing Guidelines identify the effective date of
§ 3583(h) as September 13, 1994. United States Sentencing Commission,
Guidelines Manual § 7B1.3, comment., n. 2 (Nov. 1998) (USSG). So, too,
have the federal courts. See, e. g., United States v. Hale, 107 F. 3d 526,
529, n. 3 (CA7 1997).

5 The failure to specify an effective date evidences at least arguable
difﬁdence on this point. Another section of the same Act that added
§ 3583(h) amended 18 U. S. C. § 3553 to limit the applicability of some statu-
tory minimum sentences. See § 80001, 108 Stat. 1985. That amendment,
the section made explicit, “shall apply to all sentences imposed on or after
the 10th day beginning after the date of enactment of this Act.”
§ 80001(c), 108 Stat. 1986.