Congress can’t punt its lawmaking responsibility to the attorney general
In 2006, Congress passed the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), which requires states to keep registries for those convicted of sex offenses. SORNA also makes it a federal crime for an offender to fail to register with his state.
But Congress did not want to wade into the messy details of what constitutes a “sex offense,” or what the registration requirements should be. Instead, Congress told the attorney general to issue rules deciding the “time and manner” of registration, the “information required,” and who must register.
To understand why this became a problem, consider the new rules that Garland issued last year. According to these rules, anyone who has been convicted of a relevant crime is required to register, even if their conviction was expunged. They must register in person, at least once a year, and provide local police with information that includes their Social Security number, internet usernames, work or school information, any international travel, passport and vehicle registration, and professional licenses.
My client — who shall remain anonymous here — was convicted in 1996 of a misdemeanor offense for inappropriately kissing a 16-year-old when he was 23. He was sentenced to probation and required to register as a sex offender.
He took his offense as a wake-up call. He completed hundreds of hours of therapy, obtained college degrees, and did everything he could to become a productive and valuable member of society. By 2002, his conviction was expunged by the State of California, in part because the registration requirement no longer made sense for someone like him. In 2010, a judge issued a certificate of rehabilitation recognizing my client’s extraordinary turnaround. According to California, not only does he not need to register as a sex offender, but he has no criminal history and is considered to be fully rehabilitated. California won’t let him register because it doesn’t consider him to have a conviction.
Unbelievably, the attorney general has said that in “situations in which a sex offender has failed to do something SORNA requires because it is impossible for him to do so,” such as in this case, he is presumed guilty. It would be up to him to prove his innocence at trial after being arrested and prosecuted by federal authorities — turning the presumption of innocence and due process upside down.
Those convicted of sex offenses often find little sympathy in society, even with the courts that are supposed to protect their constitutional rights. But we should all be terrified about what the attorney general is attempting to do here.
In this particular example involving a 1996 case, he’s past the Federal timeline to register anyway. 15 years for Tier 1, 25 years for Tier II so federally speaking it seems he no longer has to register?
Its ironic how the judges,prosecutors and even cops can have they’re info hidden to protect themselves and they’re family’s at the same time they put ours out there to the point of pushing it on to people who don’t go out looking for the info, ie. flyers ,phone calls etc. putting our lives as well as our family’s in danger. I’m old school in my beliefs. If they aren’t doing wrong and are treating those who come in front of them fairly, and as people , and tempering justice with mercy and not vengeance they would have nothing to fear. But when you have judges who say publicly they promise to give out a million years before they leave the bench. and give out the maximum sentence to every defendent who comes in front of them with contempt regardless of the Circumstance’s or if its a first time offender. Then they might have something to fear and need they’re info hidden. “You reap what you sew” says the good book Yep the one they all read.To bad they only read the old testament which is about Vengeance and never read the new testament which is about forgiveness and redemption.
Tim
I had this kind of judge. She was so mean that my lawyer cried, went out in the hallway and threw up in the hallway trash can. After that, I knew I was screwed. She gave me so much time I thought I would never see freedom again.
A few years later the lawyer was more experienced and redeemed himself and brought me before an appeals judge and got all of my remaining sentence thrown out. Although that was a huge win, I might as well be on probation still since the registry mirrors probation with home visits, rules, regulations, required in person check ins, and more.
As with many on here, my charges are more than 31 years ago when there was no registry. They say it is not part of your sentence but a non punitive legislation act. However once the registry was enacted (Well after I had been sentenced) people accused of sexual offenses were being told in court after whatever sentence they got, that they were also being sentenced to “X” amount of time on the registry. How is that not punitive?
Although I was added retroactively, many on this site have mentioned they were actually sentenced to sex offender registration as part of their sentencing hearing. Regardless, if the judge realized or knew what they were saying, they were handing out additional punishment. All the legislative Jargon in the Universe cannot tip toe around that without, outright lying or being in complete denial.
Cherokee I was sentenced in 2010 when I asked my lawyer about the registry and if I would have a curfew and all that he said he didn’t know but didn’t think so just go ahead and sign and let’s get this done. We can address it later well when I got out of prison found out all this crap tried to reach out to him I was told he don’t remember me,my case or ever saying anything like that and that I should have looked it up if I had questions. I proposed ge look at my file he said after 10 years they destroy the files hmm I was locked up for 10 years. Coincidence?
Not sure what happened to my other post, maybe it got censured. So, I’ll post this. I can help but see that some judges, particularly federal ones, are becoming afraid of people doing them and coming to their homes to protest. Each one of them who are speaking their concerns about this should be reminded that this type of harassment and worse has been happening to us for decades because of the public registries. Now the corrupt DOJ wants people to register or be prosecuted for not doing it even though they aren’t required to register. Yall sew where I’m going with this
I wonder if anyone has received clarification on how the federal rules will be applied? For someone no longer required to register in their state, how and when will a federal tier be determined? And will the federal rules require only reporting of information? Or are they forcing states to apply all of their presence, employment, residency, and other restrictions?
I don’t see how this scheme can stand, as it seems to be unconstitutional on several levels. First the legislature delegated it’s authority to the executive branch. Next the executive branch is seizing judicial power to determine tiers. Then they are forcing states to function as their agents in collecting information. Finally they presume the registrants guilty until proven innocent. To top it off, there doesn’t seem to be an appeals or dispute process. I think all of that taken together constitutes totalitarian rule.
I don’t think this scheme will stand but I’m not looking forward to the wait as the lawsuits to proceed.
I don’t understand this case what tier would this person fall under?