Opinion ID: 180038
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: SORNA's Statutory Provisions

Text: SORNA was enacted on July 27, 2006, to protect the public from sex offenders and to establish[ ] a comprehensive national system for the registration of those offenders. 42 U.S.C. § 16901. A sex offender is defined as an individual who was convicted of a sex offense, without limitation as to the time of conviction. 42 U.S.C. § 16911(1). SORNA provides criminal liability for any person who (1) `is required to register under [SORNA],' (2) `travels in interstate or foreign commerce,' and (3) `knowingly fails to register or update a registration.' Carr, 130 S.Ct. at 2232 (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 2250). SORNA's registration requirements are as follows: (a) In general A sex offender shall register, and keep the registration current, in each jurisdiction where the offender resides, where the offender is an employee, and where the offender is a student. For initial registration purposes only, a sex offender shall also register in the jurisdiction in which convicted if such jurisdiction is different from the jurisdiction of residence. (b) Initial registration The sex offender shall initially register (1) before completing a sentence of imprisonment with respect to the offense giving rise to the registration requirement; or (2) not later than 3 business days after being sentenced for that offense, if the sex offender is not sentenced to a term of imprisonment. (c) Keeping the registration current A sex offender shall, not later than 3 business days after each change of name, residence, employment, or student status, appear in person in at least 1 jurisdiction involved pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and inform that jurisdiction of all changes in the information required for that offender in the sex offender registry. That jurisdiction shall immediately provide that information to all other jurisdictions in which the offender is required to register. 42 U.S.C. § 16913(a)-(c). Section 16913 also grants the Attorney General certain authority with respect to sex offender registration: (d) Initial registration of sex offenders unable to comply with subsection (b) of this section The Attorney General shall have the authority to specify the applicability of the requirements of this subchapter to sex offenders convicted before [the enactment of SORNA on] July 27, 2006 or its implementation in a particular jurisdiction, and to prescribe rules for the registration of any such sex offenders and for other categories of sex offenders who are unable to comply with subsection (b) of this section. Id. § 16913(d). Pursuant to this section, on February 28, 2007, the Attorney General issued an Interim Ruling concerning whether SORNA is applicable where the conviction for the predicate sex offense occurred prior to the enactment of SORNA. 72 Fed.Reg. at 8896. The Interim Ruling stated that SORNA's direct federal law registration requirements for sex offenders are not subject to any deferral of effectiveness. They took effect when SORNA was enacted on July 27, 2006, and currently apply to all offenders in the categories for which SORNA requires registration. Id. at 8895. The Attorney General made plain that the Interim Ruling was issued, not because SORNA failed to make its registration rules applicable to pre-SORNA sex offenders, but rather to specify th[e] scope of application for SORNA, regardless of whether SORNA would apply with such scope absent th[e] rule. Id. at 8896. Thus, the Interim Ruling foreclose[d]... claims [that SORNA did not apply upon enactment to pre-SORNA sex offenders] by making it indisputably clear that SORNA applies to all sex offenders... regardless of when they were convicted. Id. In Carr, the Supreme Court recently held that criminal liability under SORNA cannot be predicated on pre-SORNA travel, 130 S.Ct. at 2233, and went on to explain that [o]nce a person becomes subject to SORNA's registration requirements, which can occur only after the statute's effective date, that person can be convicted under § 2250 [only] if he thereafter travels and then fails to register, id. at 2236 (emphasis added). Accordingly, if SORNA did not apply to Fuller until the Interim Ruling, then his interstate travel would have occurred before he was subject to SORNA's registration requirements. Id. If, on the other hand, Fuller became subject to SORNA upon its enactment, then his post-SORNA interstate travel and failure to register was unlawful irrespective of the Interim Ruling.