Reynolds v. United States

2012-01-23

Headline: Federal sex-offender registration rules do not apply to people convicted before 2006 until the Attorney General specifies applicability, limiting immediate federal enforcement against pre-Act offenders.

Holding: The Court held that the federal sex-offender registration requirements do not apply to offenders convicted before the 2006 law took effect until the Attorney General validly specifies that those requirements apply.

Real World Impact:

Pre-2006 sex offenders are not federally required to register until the Attorney General specifies applicability.
Federal prosecutions for failures to register before specification may be barred or paused.
The Attorney General’s Interim Rule (Feb 28, 2007) determines who must register federally.

Topics: sex offender registration, criminal enforcement, administrative rulemaking, interstate travel

Summary

Background

The dispute involves Billy Joe Reynolds, a man convicted of a Missouri sex offense in 2001 who registered in Missouri after his 2005 release but moved to Pennsylvania in September 2007 without updating or re-registering. Congress passed the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act on July 27, 2006, which broadly requires that “a sex offender shall register” and gives the Attorney General authority to “specify the applicability” of the registration rules to people convicted before the law. The Attorney General issued an Interim Rule on February 28, 2007 saying the law applies to all sex offenders, including those convicted before the Act. Reynolds was indicted under 18 U.S.C. §2250(a) for failing to update his registration in 2007 and argued the Interim Rule was invalid, so the Act did not apply to him before the Attorney General specified applicability. Lower courts were divided on this question.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether pre-2006 offenders are covered automatically or only after the Attorney General specifies applicability. Reading the statute’s language, the Court concluded that the clause giving the Attorney General authority to “specify the applicability” modifies the general command that a sex offender “shall register,” so the registration rules do not apply to pre-Act offenders until the Attorney General so specifies. The opinion emphasized practical implementation concerns Congress anticipated, such as differing state systems, the costs of registering many pre-Act offenders, and the need for clear guidance. The Court reversed the Third Circuit and held that applicability depends on the Attorney General’s valid specification.

Real world impact

The ruling means people convicted before the 2006 law are not automatically subject to federal criminal penalties for failure to register until the Attorney General makes a valid specification. That makes the validity and timing of the Attorney General’s February 28, 2007 Interim Rule central to prosecutions of pre-Act offenders. The Court remanded the case for further proceedings to assess the Interim Rule’s validity and resolved a split among the federal circuits.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Scalia, joined by Justice Ginsburg, dissented. He would have read the statute to apply immediately to pre-Act offenders, viewing the Attorney General’s role as authorizing exceptions rather than withholding coverage, and he warned about leaving such coverage to agency discretion.