Federal Government Publishes Proposed Changes to SORNA

[ACSOL]

The federal government yesterday published in the Federal Register proposed changes to the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA).  The changes encompass a total of 93 pages and include a wide range of topics, including retroactivity, tier levels, professional licenses and travel (both domestic and international).  Replies to the proposed regulations are due no later than October 13, 2020.

According to the proposed regulations, SORNA will apply to all individuals convicted of a sex offense, including those convicted before it was enacted.  The federal government claims to have this authority due, in part, to the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Smith v. Doe, which declared that registration did not constitute punishment, but was instead merely an administrative requirement.

“Because the proposed regulations include so many pages citing their authority to apply SORNA to individuals convicted before it was enacted, it appears that they are concerned that this matter could be challenged in court,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “It is possible that ACSOL or another like minded organization will do so.”

According to the proposed regulations, SORNA requires all registrants to comply with its requirements “regardless of whether a registration jurisdiction has substantially implemented SORNA.”  This statement is important because currently only 17 of the nation’s 50 states have substantially implemented SORNA.

The proposed regulations repeat that the federal government places registrants in three tiers.  Those assigned to Tier 1 must register for 15 years while those assigned to Tier 2 must register for 25 years.  Individuals assigned to those tiers may reduce their period of registration based upon a list of factors.  Individuals assigned to Tier 3, however, must register for a lifetime.

The proposed regulations require additional information regarding employment, including whether a registrant has one more professional licenses.

“If the proposed regulations are adopted, we can expect the federal government to notify states that have issued a professional license to a registrant,” stated Bellucci.  “We are concerned that the states will, in turn, revoke those licenses.”

According to the proposed regulations, individuals will be required to notify their local registration office if they leave the jurisdiction for seven days or longer.  This requirement is proposed allegedly in order to protect children who reside at the location(s) where a registrant may visit.

The proposed regulations also address overseas travel for those subject to the International Megan’s Law.  Specifically, the regulations will require registrants to provide additional information to the federal government regarding their overseas travel such as whether they have dual citizenship and/or a passport issued by another country.

“ACSOL began its discussion of the proposed regulations on the same day they were published,” stated Bellucci.  “ACSOL will formally reply to the proposed regulations as an individual organization or in collaboration with like-minded organizations.”

Any individual that would like to volunteer to work with ACSOL on this effort should send an email to service@all4consolaws.org

Proposed rulemaking – SORNA – Aug 2020

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

378 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Maybe SCOTUS will finally grow a pair and take this on. This is no where near what SCOTUS ruled on in Smith v. Doe.

This is a huge blow for federalism and basically gives the federal government a blank check to override state’s authority and make our lives a living hell (more than it has already).

“According to the proposed regulations, SORNA will apply to all individuals convicted of a sex offense, including those convicted before it was enacted. ”

Just when you thought 2020 couldn’t get any worse. It’s been nothing but bad news after bad news.. now this SORNA surge is the cherry on the sundae. Game over, people.

Notify if I leave the jurisdiction? Yeah right. That’ll be the day. I can get in my beautiful new SUV, point it in any direction I want, and see the country for as long as I want. Maybe one of my children would like to come with me. Maybe my wife I’m not “on paper.”

So, correct me if I’m wrong, but if this was to pass, everything that has been complished here in Michigan. The 6th Circuit ruling Michigan’s registry unconstitutional, SCOTUS by deny cert agreed with the 6th. Judge Cleland now waiting to rule after this Covid crap is over will all be thrown out the window. So just to be clear Michigan has to remove people off the registry, me and many many others, but now it could all go down the crapper.

even though the DOJ knows and publishes the recidivism rate they still use the high and frightening case from 20 years ago. nothing like a crooked goverment

there might be one saving grace to this and that is Biden gets elected up until this i was hoping for Trump for economic reasons for the Country only

“According to the proposed regulations, SORNA requires all registrants to comply with its requirements ‘regardless of whether a registration jurisdiction has substantially implemented SORNA.”

The State removed me from the Registry 4 years ago under state law (AWA non-compliant). Looks like I would end up back on the registry and stay there until 2031, military offense, if the state is willing to register me.

My Driver License record contains an entry, “NOTE: 12/20/2016 Subject: SO Text: Individual NO longer required to register AS SO AS OF 11-15-2016 per Cyrese @ UDC.” This was also confirmed by local PD.

So much for moving on with my life. Since I’ve been off the registry my income has increased by 63% and I’m just shy of six figures. Started and finished my Master’s Degree thanks to not being black listed, bought a house, raising my children.

Wow. So, any idea if we will be held to strict liability with these rules? Or do they also need to prove we intended to disobey the rule?

I read thru the entire doc. It seems to be attempt to remedy, administratively, the areas where Fed court decisions have favored defendants. For example, it devotes many pages to Nichols. Even comes across as whiny the way they justify it.

My question is, how is such a thing even possible if the jurisdiction doesn’t require information that SORNA does at the time of registration?

Okay, so let me see if I can wrap my head around this. The Feds, in all their infinite wisdom, have decided that it is vital that they force every State to abide by their asinine and inhumane system at a time when the economy is teetering on the end of total collapse, when the populace is crying out “#DefundThePolice,” and when a virus is raging across the country? Okay, boomer! This sounds like a great idea. I mean, sure, defund they very entity that will be in charge of hoarding the masses of people who are doing nothing but trying to live their lives with what they have been dealt. Do these people ever stop to ask themselves, “Self, do the thoughts that arise in my mind and the words that come forth from my mouth make me sound like a complete and utter lunatic?” We have a Congress that cannot even decide on how to best help the millions of people who need economic relief from the very disaster they themselves caused, but somehow they have the time to write over 90 pages of pure horse shit that is intended to do what? Cause more people undo suffering? I swear, these people have no intellect or an ounce of common sense to understand just how the world works outside their very comfy government provided housing.

I swear, I hope this becomes the people’s “let them eat cake” moment in our history. Just like Louis XVI and his rather tone deaf and useless bride, Marie Antoinette, wouldn’t even take the time to just look outside their mansion windows to see the starving people, now too our inept leaders haven’t the time to listen to reason and look outside to see the needs of the people. We all know what happened to heads of France’s King and Queen.

This was my favorite part!
“Likewise, from the perspective of sex offenders, face to face encounters with officers responsible for their monitoring in the local areas where they are present may help to impress on them that their identities, locations, and past criminal conduct are known to the authorities in those areas. Hence, there is a reduced likelihood of their avoiding detection and apprehension if they reoffend, and this may help them to resist the temptation to reoffend”.

So all it takes is seeing cops to stop crimes!! Beautiful! Close down all the treatment centers pronto!!

Also note that they set a 3-day requirement for changes for internet identifiers. I know some court cases felt this is unreasonable?

This is AG Barr’s attempt to exercise his ‘authoritah’ before he is swept out of office.

After the US Sup. Ct.’s decision in Gundy v US Sup. Ct., (139 S. Ct. 2116) (2019), wherein the Court ruled that there is no violation of the ‘non-delegation doctrine’ in respect to SORNA, it appears that AG Barr is seeking to actualize his newly-sanctioned powers (as he is one powerful SOB, and don’t you forget it!).

Sadly, it was the liberal minority of the US Sup. Ct. that made this ruling, the opinion written by Justices Kagan, and joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and then joined by Justice Alito (of all people) who was likely of the view that anything that helped lessen the burden of a sex offender was a bad idea. How’s that for a grouping??? *Kavanaugh was not yet on the bench at the time, and may have likely NOT joined as he (as well as Justice Gorsuch who dissented in Gundy) had written opinions when in the lower courts that were philosophically opposed.

The non-delegation doctrine, if exercised, would arguabley prohibit Congress from delegating authoritah to any other government entity (e.g., a department such as the DOJ, etc.) wherein said entity could then create its own rules or ‘laws’ which carry with it criminal penalties (incarceration and fines). The Gundy ruling in effect says: “Oh noooooo. There is NO violation of the non-delegation doctrine here. Of course the AG can make rules/regulations that CREATE felonies where none existed before. He can then execute those rules by arresting violators, who would then be subject to whatever penalty the AG has decided upon. Of course, as it applies to SORNA, there would be no trial as these would just be violations of a regulation, and merely administrative. This is because Congress expressley delegated such powers to the AG in respect to SORNA. (So in effect, the AG can act as legislator, rule maker, and and executioner. ALSO, the AG can, whenever he or she may feel like it, change these rules and regulations at his whim, after all, they are “merely regulations”). Of course, the AG must notify the citizens of any such changes, and they will have the absolute right to ‘comment upon the proposed changes to these regulations’…but keep in mind, the final determination is made solely by the AG, that powerful SOB. All of this is legal and true because (1) we, the Supreme Court, say so, and (2) Congress expressly delegated this power to the AG (as they apparently have no reason to give a damn about SO’s and can’t be bothered with such triflings). In any event, noooo problemo. Our hands are clean. Next case”

Will Allen I don’t know what to do with you. Guess a thousand rolls of TP wouldn’t help but myself as well as many others understand your point. While one can understand moral’s their is also principal involved in much of this. Actually Will we have a corrupt government in so many ways and means.
Sure I mentioned a Commonwealth State vs other states and I’m sure you all can see the difference with this TN ordeal in many of these sorted issues. When we moved my mom was still living and yes her parents lived in Huntington, WV. I could never understand the difference between a Commonwealth State vs the State I came from, and yes that is a factor to consider.
I’m sure many on the registry have paid their debt in full but its society that really don’t understand this whole issue or its a one sided ordeal. People tend to think the worse case scenario if they find out your on the registry that one attacked some child, If one actually uses some knowledge about this registry ordeal it is more harmful than someone cussing someone out but its challenging it seems and that makes much of this registry so mundane and a bit off centered. Who likes to be a scorner. Here is one more word of wisdom that one should listen to. Remember Rome fell way back when.

https://letgodbetrue.com/proverbs/index/chapter-15/proverbs-15-12/

A few issues jump out at me in this document.

1) What happens if I’m no longer required to register in my State but my State is “willing” to register me for SORNA purposes? Will my State then pop me on its registry–because I’m “registered” with them–despite no longer being required to register?

2) What all encompasses a “vehicle”? By plain definition, it’s, “a thing used for transporting people or goods, especially on land, such as a car, truck, or cart.” Tying that into 72.6(f), p. 86, where it says, “[i]f a vehicle has no license plate but has some other type of registration number or identifier, then the registration number or identifier must be provided.” So if I have an ATV, a golf cart, or even a bicycle–none of which as a license plate–I must provide the “registration number or identifier.”

3) According to 72.7(a)(2)(ii), if I am foreign-convicted and stay on the move (no residence), I don’t have to register? In other words, I could expatriate, get convicted of an offense, then come back to the US and roam the country, as long as I don’t “reside” according to any jurisdictional definition. That makes zero sense.

4) The in-person requirements of 72.7(e) are not only affirmative disabilities, they may be impossible or prohibitive. According to these rules, one must notify changes of residence, employment, and schooling in-person in those respective jurisdictions. Suppose I live in CA, telework for an AK-based company, and “attend” online schooling in MN. If I change jobs from AK to PR, I must now notify CA, then fly to PR to let them know–all within 3 days. Likewise if I stop the MN schooling and change to FL, I must notify CA, then somehow travel to FL and update them–within 3 days. Of course now that I’m in FL, they will add me to their registry for life–even though I am in the (God-awful and -forsaken) State for perhaps a few hours.

5) In 72.7(e), it says, one, “must report within three business days to his residence jurisdiction (by whatever means the jurisdiction allows) any change in remote communication identifier information,…temporary lodging information,…and any change in vehicle information[.]” So if my jurisdiction requires in-person for the named items and I’m out of State, I have to travel back to the jurisdiction. Suppose I’m traveling and join a new social media site, or my hotel catches fire and I change properties, or my car is wrecked and I get a rental. Since my jurisdiction requires in-person reporting of these, am I required to travel home to update? While compliance is impeded or difficult, it is not “prevented.”

While I “golf-clap” applaud the attempt to put things into plain-English and put it all in one place, the sly and hidden power plays are obvious, harmful, and may quite possibly put RCs at risk of prosecution.

I committed my offense in 1999 and was off the registry as of the begining of 2010 in MN. I registered for 11 years and haven’t had to register now for over 10 years. I haven’t committed a sex crime since and never will. So now let’s just stick me back on there and basically put me out on blast for ~4 years. That makes a lot of sense and will make many many people much safer.

All of this is being made possible because of public misperception of the sex offender registry and the willingness of arrogant and unscrupulous politicians to exploit public ignorance to further their careers.

What I’m saying is that we have let other people dictate our narrative for a very long time. An analogy would be like a time when blacks were cartoonishly depicted by white media and politicians to suit their agendas. The major reason that has changed over the years was in no small part African Americans taking control of their own narrative by depicting their humanity at their own terms. Also massive protests helped too…

Personally I’m sick and tired of politicians like Bill Barr speaking to the currently unenlightened Americans what danger I am to the world’s children. Screw you Bill Barr, you don’t know me, you don’t even know my case, and you want talk smack about me just so people would look away at the crimes you have committed for your corrupt boss for a minute.

The time has come to take my Narrative back…Keep your eyes on social media…

@ Bo. Enter good ole Smokey the bear. When prevention runs amuch than understanding and true values of justice or anything can be ruined. That just makes common sense. Sure justice has to be serviced unless you get to strung out on yourself and it seems this American Justice is. Their are some key elements in this registry issue that are very unbiblical. Preventing and causing to prevent are not in very good taste and clash with each other. And yes you have your lying and deception.

Should we all greet our probation officer as hello sinner or would that be respectful. Should we all always obey the law of the land, the civil justice, when things go amiss and riots break out like the two police and one woman in Charlottesville. Obeying the law is good but in the case of this deceiving ordeal, with much of this sex registry computer intent, as I have said on here.. the bible says and talks about…… what man know’s the thoughts and intent of another.

Talk about someone getting away with stealing another person’s self- worth or crediability.
Theirs an article I picked up on here many years ago by doing some research and yes something like this can make anyone feel down. Sure there is a time to obey and disobey.

Bo if I had obeyed that first night in my ordeal I wouldn’t have much grounds to stand on. Even my public defender said take the plea deal for right now as you know how hard they are on these cases and yes my lawyer dropped out of the case so their is a twang of mixture in that one also. Call it what you will but God does not tempt and in a situation such as this sex ordeal internet encounter and other ordeals the devil is doing the bidding. One can call it discernment or discering the spirits but their is a moral to all this judgement that is so out of line many are falsely imprisoned by this inducement

Look at how many people are sweeped under the rug by all this. If it seems to good to be true its not really true. That is why listening is very important. I even talked to the person on the phone. Actually Janice and her team are like the A-team for real constutional justice. So who is playing the devil in this ordeal of justice by computer means when authorities are getting out of hand with all this.

.https://www.hiskingdomprophecy.com/warning-to-wicked-rulers-warning-to-america/

If Smith v Doe 2003 is their foundation, then I suggest the federal government be fed a great does of true facts with Dr. Ira and Tara Ellman’s academic paper “Frightening and High” as well as the NY Times video research work on the false information used in Smith v Doe 2003.

I’d like to re-visit Smith v Doe just like Barr revisited Gen Flynn’s case and discovered false information about Gen Flynn to want to dismiss his case.

Seems fair.

IIRC, Smith v Doe 2003 focused upon the Alaska registry, where it was done via mail. Thus, no physical disability was identified in the case, otherwise it would at least prove one of the MM factors for punishment.

Reading this article made me infuriated. grrrr

This is awful. Seems like the one-way sex offender ratchet only continues to tighten the other way (toward worse laws). When I used to attend a 12 step program, I knew a person who used to live in an AWA state and he said registering every 90 days with the police in that state was “awful.” This is probably the worst sex offender news I’ve read in over 10 years. And the worst part is the media is completely silent about this. Imagine having to remember all your e-mail addresses, account usernames, etc. If you forget even one, that puts you at risk of going back to prison for a FEDERAL OFFENSE. Then on top of this all, what effect would doing that have on chilling free speech from sex offenders criticizing unfair laws and pointing out the truth? Seems like chilling free speech and chilling unpopular speech is the government’s intent though.

The only positive thing about this is is the 15/25 year AWA registration periods automatic? Or do you still have to go to the B.S. “petitioning” process? With the tiered law, we have to show “completion” of a casomb-approved program. With this AWA, is it 15/25 years and you’re automatically off of having to register? I would do five more years if it means not having to shell out $20k on a casomb-approved treatment program to show to the court before my “petition” is approved.

I live in PA. Convicted in Dec 2006. Registration start date Oct 2010. Scheduled to come off reg in Oct of this year (2020). So does this mean now I may have to register for another 5 years. The law was just changed about 2 years ago where i was removed from the tier system and put back to 10 years from 15 years.

This makes my head spin. I was planning on selling my house next year and moving to a new neighborhood after I am off the registry (this year) so I can get a fresh start with my neighbors.

I read through this, but I’m not an attorney so I’m trying to wrap my mind around this. Does this essentially take the Tiered Registry Bill, and tear it up? Also, since most registrants in California are 288(a), does this mean they go back to lifetime status? How do you “petition” off SORNA?
Can someone answer these for me?
Thank you!

1 2 3 5