Registration Requirements Under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, 69856-69887 [2021-26420]
Download as PDF
69856
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Part 72
[Docket No. OAG 157; AG Order No. 5244–
2021]
RIN 1105–AB52
Registration Requirements Under the
Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act
Office of the Attorney General,
Department of Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Department of Justice is
adopting a rule that specifies the
registration requirements under the Sex
Offender Registration and Notification
Act (‘‘SORNA’’). The rule in part reflects
express requirements of SORNA and in
part reflects the exercise of authorities
SORNA grants to the Attorney General
to interpret and implement SORNA’s
requirements. SORNA’s requirements
have previously been delineated in
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General for implementation of SORNA’s
requirements by registration
jurisdictions.
DATES: This rule is effective January 7,
2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David J. Karp, Senior Counsel, Office of
Legal Policy, U.S. Department of Justice,
Washington, DC, 202–514–3273.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule
finalizes a proposed rule, Registration
Requirements Under the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act (OAG
157; RIN 1105–AB52) (published
August 13, 2020, at 85 FR 49332).
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
SUMMARY:
Overview
The Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act (‘‘SORNA’’), which is
title I of the Adam Walsh Child
Protection and Safety Act of 2006,
Public Law 109–248, 34 U.S.C. 20901 et
seq., establishes national standards for
sex offender registration and
notification in the United States.
SORNA has a dual character, imposing
registration obligations on sex offenders
as a matter of Federal law that are
federally enforceable under
circumstances supporting Federal
jurisdiction, see 18 U.S.C. 2250, and
providing minimum national standards
that non-Federal jurisdictions are
expected to incorporate in their sex
offender registration and notification
programs, subject to a reduction of
Federal funding for those that fail to do
so, see 34 U.S.C. 20912(a), 20926–27.
The Justice Department’s Office of Sex
Offender Sentencing, Monitoring,
Apprehending, Registering, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
Tracking (‘‘SMART Office’’) administers
the national standards for sex offender
registration and notification under
SORNA and assists all jurisdictions in
implementing the SORNA standards in
their programs. See id. 20945. As
provided by SORNA, the Department of
Justice also (i) prosecutes SORNA
violations by sex offenders committed
under circumstances supporting Federal
jurisdiction, see 18 U.S.C. 2250; (ii)
assists in the enforcement of sex
offender registration requirements
through the activities of the U.S.
Marshals Service, see 34 U.S.C. 20941;
(iii) operates, through the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, the National
Sex Offender Registry, which compiles
the information obtained through the
sex offender registration programs of the
states and other registration
jurisdictions and makes it available on
a nationwide basis for law enforcement
purposes, see id. 20921; and (iv)
operates the Dru Sjodin National Sex
Offender Public website,
www.nsopw.gov, which provides public
access through a single national site to
the information about sex offenders
posted on the public sex offender
websites of the various registration
jurisdictions, see id. 20922.
SORNA generally directs the Attorney
General to ‘‘issue guidelines and
regulations to interpret and implement
[SORNA].’’ Id. 20912(b). SORNA also
authorizes the Attorney General to take
more specific actions in certain
contexts.
One such provision is 34 U.S.C.
20913. That section states in subsection
(b) that sex offenders are generally to
register initially before release from
imprisonment, or within three business
days of sentencing if not sentenced to
imprisonment, but it provides further in
subsection (d) that the Attorney General
has ‘‘the authority to specify the
applicability of the requirements of
[SORNA] to sex offenders convicted
before the enactment of [SORNA] 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).’’ As discussed
below in connection with 28 CFR 72.3,
section 20913(d) is not a
constitutionally impermissible
delegation of legislative authority.
Rather, it enables the Attorney General
to effectuate the legislative intent that
SORNA apply to all sex offenders,
regardless of when they were convicted.
Another relevant provision lists
several types of information that sex
offenders must provide for inclusion in
sex offender registries, and states that
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
sex offenders must also provide ‘‘[a]ny
other information required by the
Attorney General.’’ Id. 20914(a)(8). This
provision as well is not an
impermissible delegation of legislative
authority, but rather is instrumental to
the Attorney General’s effectuating the
legislative objective to ‘‘protect the
public from sex offenders and offenders
against children’’ by ‘‘establish[ing] a
comprehensive national system for the
registration of those offenders.’’ Id.
20901; see 73 FR at 38054–57; 76 FR at
1637. The Attorney General’s exercise of
the authority under section 20914(a)(8)
is limited to requiring additional
information that furthers the legislative
public safety objective or the
implementation or enforcement of
SORNA’s provisions. How that has been
done is explained below in connection
with 28 CFR 72.6 and 72.7.
The Attorney General has exercised
these authorities in previous
rulemakings and issuances of guidelines
under SORNA, as detailed in the
rulemaking history and section-bysection analysis below, and the
interpretations and policy decisions in
this rule follow those already adopted in
existing SORNA-related documents. The
present rule provides a concise and
comprehensive statement of what sex
offenders must do to comply with
SORNA’s requirements.
In addition to SORNA’s original
provisions, described above, this
rulemaking draws on and implements
provisions of the International Megan’s
Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and
Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced
Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders
(‘‘International Megan’s Law’’), Public
Law 114–119. Section 6 of International
Megan’s Law amended SORNA by (i)
redesignating, in 34 U.S.C. 20914(a),
former paragraph (7) as paragraph (8)
and adding a new paragraph (7) that
requires a sex offender to provide for
inclusion in the sex offender registry
information relating to intended travel
outside the United States, including
several specified types of information
‘‘and any other itinerary or other travelrelated information required by the
Attorney General’’; (ii) adding a new
subsection (c) to 34 U.S.C. 20914 that
requires sex offenders to provide and
update registration information required
by SORNA ‘‘in conformity with any
time and manner requirements
prescribed by the Attorney General’’;
and (iii) adding a new subsection (b) to
SORNA’s criminal provision, 18 U.S.C.
2250, that specifically reaches
international travel reporting violations.
This rulemaking is not innovative in
terms of policy. Many of the
requirements it articulates reflect
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
express SORNA requirements. These
include, inter alia, statutory
specifications about (i) where and when
sex offenders must register; (ii) several
categories of required registration
information; (iii) how long sex offenders
must continue to register, including
different registration periods for sex
offenders in different tiers and lifetime
registration for those in the highest tier;
and (iv) a requirement to appear
periodically to verify the registration
information. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(2)–(4),
20913, 20914(a)(1)–(7), 20915, 20918.
Other features of the rule reflect
exercises of the Attorney General’s
powers to implement SORNA’s
requirements. These include additional
specifications regarding information sex
offenders must provide, how and when
they must report certain changes in
registration information, and the time
and manner for complying with
SORNA’s registration requirements by
sex offenders who cannot comply with
SORNA’s normal registration
procedures. On these matters, however,
the rule embodies the same policies as
those appearing in the previously issued
SORNA guidelines and prior
rulemakings under SORNA.
The rule also makes no change in
what registration jurisdictions need to
do to substantially implement SORNA
in their registration programs, a matter
that will continue to be governed by the
previously issued guidelines for SORNA
implementation.
While this rule does not make new
policy, as discussed above, it is
expected to have a number of benefits.
The rule will facilitate enforcement of
SORNA’s registration requirements
through prosecution of noncompliant
sex offenders under 18 U.S.C. 2250. By
providing a comprehensive articulation
of SORNA’s registration requirements in
regulations addressed to sex offenders,
it will provide a more secure basis for
prosecution of sex offenders who engage
in knowing violations of any of
SORNA’s requirements. It will also
resolve a number of specific concerns
that have arisen in past litigation or
could be expected to arise in future
litigation, if not clarified and resolved
by this rule. For example, as discussed
below, the amendment of § 72.3 in the
rule will ensure that its application of
SORNA’s requirements to sex offenders
with pre-SORNA convictions is given
effect consistently, resolving an issue
resulting from the decision in United
States v. DeJarnette, 741 F.3d 971 (9th
Cir. 2013).
Beyond the benefits to effective
enforcement of SORNA’s requirements,
the rule will benefit sex offenders by
providing a clear and comprehensive
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
statement of their registration
obligations under SORNA. This
statement will make it easier for sex
offenders to determine what they are
required to do and thus facilitate
compliance.
By facilitating the enforcement of, and
compliance with, SORNA’s registration
requirements, the rule will further
SORNA’s public safety objectives. See
34 U.S.C. 20901. More consistent
adherence to these requirements will
enable registration and law enforcement
authorities to better track and monitor
released sex offenders in the community
and enhance the basis for public
notification regarding registered sex
offenders that SORNA requires. See id.
20920, 20923.
Effective September 1, 2017, the
provisions of SORNA, formerly
appearing at 42 U.S.C. 16901 et seq.,
were recodified in a new title 34 of the
United States Code, and now appear at
34 U.S.C. 20901 et seq. See https://
uscode.house.gov/editorial
reclassification/t34/. United
States Code citations of SORNA
provisions in this rule accordingly differ
from the corresponding citations in
earlier sources and documents.
Rulemaking History
This rule is the tenth document the
Attorney General has published
pursuant to the statutory directive to the
Attorney General to issue guidelines
and regulations to interpret and
implement SORNA. See 34 U.S.C.
20912(b). The previous SORNA-related
documents are as follows:
(1) Interim rule entitled,
‘‘Applicability of the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act,’’
published at 72 FR 8894 (Feb. 28, 2007).
The interim rule solicited public
comments, and the comment period
ended on April 30, 2007. The interim
rule added a new part 72 to title 28 of
the Code of Federal Regulations,
entitled ‘‘Sex Offender Registration and
Notification.’’ The interim rule provided
that ‘‘[t]he requirements of the Sex
Offender Registration and Notification
Act apply to all sex offenders, including
sex offenders convicted of the offense
for which registration is required prior
to the enactment of that Act.’’ 28 CFR
72.3.
(2) Proposed guidelines, published at
72 FR 30210 (May 30, 2007), whose
general purpose was to provide
guidance and assistance to registration
jurisdictions in implementing the
SORNA standards in their sex offender
registration and notification programs.
The proposed guidelines solicited
public comment, and the comment
period ended on August 1, 2007.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69857
(3) Final guidelines for registration
jurisdictions regarding SORNA
implementation entitled, ‘‘The National
Guidelines for Sex Offender Registration
and Notification’’ (the ‘‘SORNA
Guidelines’’), published at 73 FR 38030
(July 2, 2008).
(4) Proposed supplemental guidelines
for SORNA implementation, published
at 75 FR 27362 (May 14, 2010), whose
general purpose was to address certain
issues arising in SORNA
implementation that required that some
aspects of the SORNA Guidelines be
augmented or modified. The proposed
supplemental guidelines solicited
public comment, and the comment
period closed on July 13, 2010.
(5) Final rule entitled, ‘‘Applicability
of the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act,’’ published at 75 FR
81849 (Dec. 29, 2010). This rule
finalized the February 28, 2007, interim
rule providing for SORNA’s
applicability to all sex offenders,
including those with pre-SORNA
convictions.
(6) Final supplemental guidelines for
SORNA implementation entitled,
‘‘Supplemental Guidelines for Sex
Offender Registration and Notification’’
(the ‘‘SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines’’), published at 76 FR 1630
(Jan. 11, 2011).
(7) Proposed supplemental guidelines,
published at 81 FR 21397 (Apr. 11,
2016), whose general purpose was to
afford registration jurisdictions greater
flexibility in their efforts to substantially
implement SORNA’s juvenile
registration requirement. These
proposed supplemental guidelines
solicited public comment, and the
comment period closed on June 10,
2016.
(8) Final supplemental guidelines
regarding substantial implementation of
SORNA’s juvenile registration
requirement entitled, ‘‘Supplemental
Guidelines for Juvenile Registration
Under the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act,’’ published at 81 FR
50552 (Aug. 1, 2016).
(9) Proposed rule entitled,
‘‘Registration Requirements Under the
Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act,’’ published at 85 FR
49332 (Aug. 13, 2020). The proposed
rule solicited public comments and the
comment period closed on October 13,
2020.
Summary of Comments
The Department of Justice received
over 700 comments on this rulemaking
from individuals and organizations.
Most of the comments amounted to
general criticisms of sex offender
registration or SORNA. Some of the
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
69858
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
comments proposed specific changes to
the provisions of the proposed rule.
Having carefully considered all
comments, the Department of Justice
has concluded that the regulations in
this rulemaking should be promulgated
without change from the proposed rule,
except for amendment of § 72.8(a)(1)(i)–
(ii) to specify the circumstances in
which SORNA violations may result in
Federal criminal liability. The ensuing
discussion summarizes the principal
issues that were raised in the public
comments.
General Comments
Most of the comments received
amounted to general criticisms of sex
offender registration or associated
public notification requirements.
Comments of this nature generally
argued that sex offender registration is
of little or no value in protecting public
safety and that any value it may have is
outweighed by adverse effects on sex
offenders and their families. Some
comments in this class proposed that
sex offender registration be restricted, if
not entirely eliminated, such as by
narrowly limiting the sex offenders or
sex offenses for which registration is
required, ending disclosure of
information about sex offenders to the
general public, setting shorter
registration periods, or providing
broader means for terminating
registration. Some of these comments
criticized requirements in this rule that
track express statutory requirements,
including the statutory requirements
relating to the jurisdictions in which sex
offenders must register, the information
sex offenders must provide, the duration
of registration periods, and reporting
and verification of certain information
through in-person appearances. See 34
U.S.C. 20913–16, 20918.
These comments could not be
accepted in this rulemaking because the
Attorney General has no authority to
repeal the requirements enacted by
Congress in SORNA or the sex offender
registration laws of non-Federal
jurisdictions. This rule interprets and
implements SORNA, as directed by 34
U.S.C. 20912(b). The Attorney General’s
regulatory authority under SORNA does
not include second-guessing the
underlying legislative policy judgments
or nullifying the measures that Congress
has adopted in the law. See 73 FR at
38036.
Some comments criticized the rule’s
specification of registration
requirements which, wholly or in part,
do not appear expressly in SORNA. The
matters criticized included
requirements to provide information
about actual and purported dates of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
birth and Social Security numbers,
temporary lodging away from residence,
passports and immigration documents,
and professional licenses. In addition to
comments criticizing the extent of the
information required by the rule, some
comments in this class criticized
requirements adopted by the Attorney
General to keep registration information
up to date. These include requirements
to report in advance departure from a
jurisdiction, the requirement to report
within three business days changes
relating to remote communication
identifiers, temporary lodging, and
vehicle information, and the
requirement to report international
travel at least 21 days in advance.
The Attorney General has adopted
these measures in the exercise of powers
that SORNA provides to interpret and
implement SORNA, specify required
registration information, and prescribe
time-and-manner requirements for
providing and updating the information.
See 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), 20914(a)(7)–(8),
(c). Each of these measures is justified
as a means of furthering SORNA’s
objective of protecting the public from
sex offenders and offenders against
children by establishing a
comprehensive national registration
system, see id. 20901, or as a means of
implementing or enforcing SORNA’s
provisions. The specific reasons for the
various requirements are explained in
the section-by-section analysis below.
The comments received provided no
persuasive grounds to abrogate or
modify these requirements.
Some comments argued that SORNA
or this rule are unconstitutional on
various grounds, such as the
prohibitions of cruel and unusual
punishment, double jeopardy, and ex
post facto laws, the right to travel, and
the requirement of due process. Claims
of this nature are familiar to the
Department of Justice, having been
raised in litigative challenges to SORNA
and rejected by the Federal courts. See,
e.g., Willman v. Att’y Gen., 972 F.3d
819, 824–27 (6th Cir. 2020). The
comments provided no persuasive
reason to believe that any aspect of
SORNA or this rule is unconstitutional.
Some comments objected to the
application of SORNA’s requirements to
sex offenders whose offenses or
convictions predate SORNA, as
provided in § 72.3 in this rule. Section
72.3 is necessary to implement
Congress’s intent that SORNA apply to
all sex offenders, regardless of when
they were convicted. See Reynolds v.
United States, 565 U.S. 432, 442–45
(2012); id. at 448–49 & n. (Scalia, J.,
dissenting) (agreeing that Congress
intended for SORNA to apply to all sex
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
offenders); Gundy v. United States, 139
S. Ct. 2116, 2123–30 (2019) (plurality
opinion). The section-by-section
analysis below provides further
explanation of the provisions and
rationale of § 72.3.
Some comments objected to
substantive restrictions imposed on sex
offenders in some jurisdictions, such as
restrictions on where they can live,
prohibitions of proximity to schools or
children, or exclusion from some types
of employment. These comments are not
germane to this rule, which articulates
SORNA’s registration requirements for
sex offenders, because SORNA’s
requirements are informational in
nature and do not restrict where sex
offenders can go or what they can do.
See 73 FR at 38032. A similar response
applies to comments that were critical
of requirements under other laws that
identification documents, such as
passports and drivers’ licenses, include
notations identifying the holders as sex
offenders. These comments are
misdirected in relation to this rule
because SORNA does not impose such
requirements, and, where they are
prescribed by other laws, the Attorney
General has no authority to rescind or
modify them by rulemaking.
Some comments criticized public
disclosure of information about sex
offenders, arguing that access to
information in the sex offender
registries should be limited to law
enforcement or otherwise narrowly
restricted. These comments concern the
scope of disclosure of sex offender
information by registration jurisdictions
and, as such, are not germane to this
rule, which concerns SORNA’s
registration requirements for sex
offenders. Disclosure of sex offender
information is separately addressed in
statutory provisions that are not
implicated by this rulemaking and in
the SORNA Guidelines and SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines. See 34 U.S.C.
20916(c), 20920, 20922–23; 73 FR at
38042, 38058–61; 76 FR at 1632–33,
1636–37.
Some comments supported issuance
of this rule. The benefits perceived by
these commenters included protecting
public safety, clarifying SORNA’s
registration requirements for sex
offenders, and promoting compliance
with those requirements.
A Comment Proposing 10 Changes in
the Rule
A lengthy comment proposed 10
specific changes in the rule:
(i) The comment proposed that the
rule and each discrete requirement
therein should be revised to say that
registrants need only comply when
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
circumstances supporting Federal
jurisdiction are present. Section
72.8(a)(1)(i)–(ii) in the final rule
reproduces the required jurisdictional
circumstances under 18 U.S.C. 2250,
making clear the conditions that must
be satisfied to support Federal criminal
liability for SORNA violations. It would
be misleading or incorrect to state that
sex offenders need not comply with the
requirements set forth in this rule in a
broader sense, absent grounds
supporting Federal jurisdiction, because
those requirements are widely
paralleled in the sex offender
registration laws of the states and other
non-Federal jurisdictions. See National
Institute of Justice, Tracking Sex
Offenders: Federal Law, Resources Have
Led to Marked Improvement of State
Registries, But More Work Is Needed
(Nov. 13, 2020) (‘‘At least half the states
met implementation thresholds for 13 of
the 14 SORNA standard areas; 75% of
the states met the thresholds for at least
nine areas; and 92% of the states met
them for at least half of the SORNA
areas.’’). Sex offenders accordingly may
be subject to criminal penalties under
state law for violating these
requirements, regardless of whether
grounds for Federal jurisdiction exist.
While § 72.8(a)(1)(i)–(ii) has been
revised in the final rule to state
explicitly the scope of Federal
jurisdiction to prosecute SORNA
violations under 18 U.S.C. 2250, the
comment was not persuasive that the
jurisdictional limitation should be
referenced repeatedly throughout the
rule, since the statement in
§ 72.8(a)(1)(i)–(ii) is clear.
(ii) The comment proposed that the
rule incorporate a clear statement that a
registrant’s duty to act under SORNA
arises only when the registrant travels
interstate and that travel has a nexus to
the alleged SORNA violation. In
referring to a registrant’s ‘‘duty’’ to act,
the comment apparently meant
amenability to Federal prosecution
under 18 U.S.C. 2250 in case of a
violation. The proposed change is
legally incorrect. The grounds of Federal
jurisdiction under section 2250 include
grounds other than interstate travel,
such as conviction for a Federal sex
offense or travel in foreign commerce,
and section 2250 specifies no required
‘‘nexus’’ between interstate travel and
the charged SORNA violation beyond
the temporal sequencing implied by the
provision’s language and structure. See
Carr v. United States, 560 U.S. 438, 446
(2010).
(iii) The comment argued, based on
the Supreme Court’s decision in Nichols
v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1113 (2016),
that the rule’s requirements to report
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
departure from a jurisdiction and
termination of residence in a
jurisdiction under § 72.7(d) and (g)
exceed the Attorney General’s powers
under 34 U.S.C. 20914(a) and (c).
Adopting these requirements is within
the Attorney General’s powers under
SORNA, and consistent with the
Nichols decision, as explained in the
section-by-section analysis below.
(iv) The comment proposed that the
rule state that § 72.7(g) absolves
registrants of a duty to report
information required by SORNA when
state law or the local agency does not
require that information. The proposed
statement is legally incorrect because
SORNA’s requirements exist
independently of state law
requirements, see Willman, 972 F.3d at
821–24, and it is not needed to avoid
unfairness to sex offenders based on
differences between SORNA’s
requirements and state law
requirements. Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in
this rule explains that sex offenders are
not held liable under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for
violation of registration requirements of
which they are unaware, and
noncompliance with SORNA may be
excused where compliance is prevented
by circumstances beyond their control,
such as a jurisdiction’s failure to carry
out a necessary complementary role.
These principles apply to all
requirements under SORNA, including
the requirement of § 72.6 to provide
specified types of information for
inclusion in the registry. Hence, a sex
offender is not held liable for failing to
provide a type of information if he is
unaware of a requirement to provide
that information, as may be the case if
a jurisdiction does not request that
information in its registration forms,
and failure to provide any type of
information may be excused if a
jurisdiction will not accept that
information for inclusion in its registry.
(v) The comment asserted that the
interpretation of the affirmative defense
of 18 U.S.C. 2250(c), in the analysis
statement’s discussion of §§ 72.7(g) and
72.8, violates due process because it
shifts the burden of proof to defendants.
However, § 72.8(a)(1)(iii) explains that
liability under 18 U.S.C. 2250(a)–(b) is
conditioned on the defendant’s being
aware of the requirement he is charged
with violating. The regulation and the
accompanying analysis do not impose
on the defendant a burden of proving
that he lacked such awareness. Section
72.8(a)(2) states that there is an
affirmative defense to liability for
noncompliance with SORNA in certain
circumstances, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
2250(c). The regulation and the
accompanying discussion do not change
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69859
the burden of proof on this defense,
which Congress has expressly made an
‘‘affirmative defense.’’ Id.
(vi) The comment asserted that
§ 72.6(b), requiring the reporting of
remote communication identifiers,
violates the First Amendment on
grounds of ambiguity and because, the
comment claimed, it infringes on the
right to anonymous speech unless
accompanied by restrictions on public
disclosure of the identifiers. The rule’s
specification of covered identifiers is
similar to a statutory definition in 34
U.S.C. 20916(e)(2) and sufficiently
definite. The conditions for disclosure
of sex offender information by
registration jurisdictions are beyond the
scope of this rulemaking, which
concerns the registration requirements
for sex offenders under SORNA.
Separate statutory provisions and the
SORNA Guidelines and SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines specify those
conditions, which include restrictions
on the disclosure of remote
communication identifiers. See 34
U.S.C. 20916(c); 73 FR at 38059–60; 76
FR at 1633, 1637.
(vii) The comment asserted that § 72.8
is deficient because it does not
expressly refer to the required
jurisdictional predicates under 18
U.S.C. 2250. As formulated in this final
rule, § 72.8 sets forth those
jurisdictional predicates.
(viii) The comment asserted that the
rule is impermissibly vague in a number
of respects, including its definition of
remote communication identifiers, the
requirement that sex offenders lacking
fixed residence addresses or places of
employment report the relevant
locations with whatever definiteness is
possible under the circumstances, the
requirement that sex offenders report
information concerning places they are
staying when away from their
residences for seven or more days, and
the meaning of a ‘‘clean record’’ that
may reduce the registration period for
certain sex offenders. However, the
specification of covered remote
communication identifiers in § 72.6(b) is
similar to a statutory definition in 34
U.S.C. 20916(e)(2) and sufficiently
definite. Where sex offenders do not
have definite places of residence or
employment, the information they
provide under § 72.6(c)(1) and (c)(3) as
to where they are living or working
must be of a less definite nature, and it
is reasonable to require that the
information be provided with whatever
definiteness is possible under the
circumstances. The matter is further
explained in the section-by-section
analysis below and in 73 FR at 38056.
The information required by § 72.6(c)(2)
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
69860
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
is ‘‘temporary lodging information’’ and
a related provision, § 72.7(e), requires
sex offenders to report this information
to their residence jurisdictions within
three business days. The two provisions
adequately convey that a sex offender,
within three business days of returning
to his residence, must report to the
residence jurisdiction the places he has
lodged while away from his residence
for seven or more days. Section 72.5(c)
refers to a ‘‘clean record’’ as described
in 34 U.S.C. 20915(b)(1), so the meaning
set forth in that statutory provision
applies.
(ix) The comment proposed that
§ 72.5(c) should clarify that clean record
reductions for tier I offenders and
(juvenile delinquent) tier III offenders
are automatic. Section 72.5(c) states that
satisfaction of the clean record
requirement reduces the registration
period for the affected classes of sex
offenders. The conditions a sex offender
must satisfy to effect such a reduction
are those specified in the applicable
statute: ‘‘(A) not being convicted of any
offense for which imprisonment for
more than 1 year may be imposed; (B)
not being convicted of any sex offense;
(C) successfully completing any periods
of supervised release, probation, and
parole; and (D) successfully completing
of [sic] an appropriate sex offender
treatment program certified by a
jurisdiction or by the Attorney General.’’
34 U.S.C. 20915(b)(1).
(x) The comment stated that the rule
should be revised to include a
federalism assessment and other
requirements under Executive Order
13132 and the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act. However, the relevant
regulatory certifications below are
correct as they are. This rule satisfies
the requirements of Executive Order
13132 and the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act.
A Comment Proposing 13 Changes or
Sets of Changes in the Rule
Another comment proposed the
following changes in the rule:
(i) The comment argued that § 72.5,
relating to the duration of the
registration period under SORNA,
should be changed in various ways. It
first argued that § 72.5 as drafted
conflicts with a provision of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act, which, the
comment asserted, states that arrests
and convictions may only be reported
on background checks for seven years
after release from prison. The reference
is apparently to 15 U.S.C. 1681c, which
generally ‘‘prohibits [consumer]
reporting agencies from disclosing any
arrest record or other adverse item more
than seven years old but permits them
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
to report ‘records of convictions of
crimes’ no matter how long ago they
occurred.’’ Aldaco v. RentGrow, Inc.,
921 F.3d 685, 687 (7th Cir. 2019)
(quoting 15 U.S.C. 1681c(a)). Section
72.5 describes the duration of
registration required by SORNA. See 34
U.S.C. 20915. It does not affect what
may be included in consumer reports
and does not conflict with the Fair
Credit Reporting Act. The comment also
stated that § 72.5 should be changed to
establish standardized procedures for
determining sex offenders’ tiers, how
long each offender will remain on the
registry, and what restrictions can be
placed on registrants in compliance
with their constitutional rights, and
should create a way for tier II offenders
to petition for early removal from the
registry. The procedures for registration
jurisdictions to determine sex offenders’
tiers are outside the scope of this
rulemaking, but the SORNA Guidelines
provide related guidance. See 73 FR at
38052–54. The duration of registration
under SORNA is governed by statutory
criteria, see 34 U.S.C. 20915, and cannot
be changed by rulemaking. The statutes
include no provision for reducing the
registration periods of tier II offenders.
Id. Assessing what restrictions can
constitutionally be placed on sex
offenders, such as restrictions on where
sex offenders may live or work, is
outside the scope of this rulemaking,
which concerns SORNA’s registration
requirements for sex offenders.
(ii) The comment criticized § 72.6(b),
relating to remote communication
identifiers, as likely violating the First
Amendment and overly vague. The
comment provided no persuasive reason
to believe that § 72.6(b) is
unconstitutional. The description of
covered remote communication
identifiers in § 72.6(b) is similar to a
statutory definition appearing in 34
U.S.C. 20916(e)(2) and sufficiently
definite.
(iii) The comment claimed that
§ 72.6(c)(2)’s requirement to report
temporary lodging information violates
a constitutional right to travel because,
the comment asserted, most places of
lodging will not knowingly allow sex
offenders to stay at their locations if a
sex offender’s travel plans are disclosed
to them. The rule requires sex offenders
to report temporary lodging information
within three business days, not in
advance, and it requires reporting of the
information to the sex offender’s
residence jurisdiction, not the premises
where he intends to stay. See § 72.7(e).
The comment provided no persuasive
reason to believe that this requirement
violates any constitutional right.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(iv) The comment proposed to
eliminate § 72.6(c)(3), on the ground
that disclosure of sex offenders’
employment information will adversely
affect the employers and adversely
affect the sex offenders’ ability to obtain
employment. Section 72.6 only requires
sex offenders to provide employment
information to registration jurisdictions.
It does not address the public disclosure
of such information and, more broadly,
the conditions for disclosure of
information about sex offenders are
outside the scope of this rulemaking.
The SORNA Guidelines separately
address the disclosure of sex offender
information, including employment
information. See 73 FR at 38042–43,
38059.
(v) The comment claimed that
§ 72.6(c)(4)’s requirement to provide
school attendance information violates a
right to attend public schools without
hindrance from the government and a
First Amendment right of free
association because, the comment
asserted, most colleges and universities
will not allow registered sex offenders
to enroll. However, SORNA requires
school attendance information, see 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(5), and that requirement
cannot be abrogated by rulemaking.
Section 72.6(c)(4) requires sex offenders
to provide school attendance
information for inclusion in the
registries. It does not require or
encourage schools to deny enrollment to
registered sex offenders, and any
schools that have such a policy would
potentially deny admission to registered
sex offenders regardless of whether
SORNA or this rule requires sex
offenders to provide school attendance
information for inclusion in the
registries. The comment provided no
persuasive reason to believe that this
requirement violates any provision of
the Constitution.
(vi) With respect to § 72.6(d), which
requires reporting of international travel
information, the comment stated that
the U.S. government should be
prohibited from providing travel plans
to foreign nations. Congress made a
contrary judgment in International
Megan’s Law, whose purposes include,
as stated in its title, ‘‘[t]o protect
children and others from sexual abuse
and exploitation, including sex
trafficking and sex tourism, by
providing advance notice of intended
travel by registered sex offenders
outside the United States to the
government of the country of
destination’’. Public Law 114–119; see
Doe v. Kerry, Case No. 16–cv–0654–PJH,
2016 WL 5339804 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 23,
2016), appeal dismissed, No. 16–17100,
2017 WL 5514566 (9th Cir. 2017)
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
(explaining the background and
purposes of International Megan’s Law
and rejecting a constitutional challenge).
(vii) The comment claimed that
§ 72.6(g)’s requirement to disclose
professional licenses violates a right to
engage in commerce because states may
revoke such licenses if notified that the
licensee is a registered sex offender. The
rule does not require states to revoke
professional licenses issued to
registered sex offenders. Whether and to
what extent criminal histories including
sex offenses should be disqualifying for
professional licenses, such as licenses to
teach children or to be care providers
for persons in vulnerable populations,
are matters for the states’ judgment. The
comment provided no persuasive reason
to believe that requiring sex offenders to
report professional licenses is
unconstitutional.
(viii) With respect to § 72.8, the
comment asserted that the jurisdictional
predicate of travel in interstate or
foreign commerce in 18 U.S.C. 2250
should be interpreted to apply only on
the basis of business-related travel.
There is no basis for such a restriction;
it would depart from the interpretation
of travel in interstate or foreign
commerce in other federal laws; and it
would conflict with SORNA’s objective
of reliably tracking sex offenders as they
relocate among jurisdictions or travel
abroad.
(ix) With respect to § 72.6(c)(3), which
requires sex offenders to report the
names and addresses of places of
employment, the comment argued that
this information should not be made
public. The matter is outside the scope
of this rulemaking, which concerns the
registration requirements for sex
offenders under SORNA, not the
conditions for disclosure of sex offender
information by registration jurisdictions.
The SORNA Guidelines address the
latter issue, including disclosure of
employment information. See 73 FR at
38042–43, 38059.
(x) The comment took issue with the
regulatory certification below relating to
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563. The
comment assumed that the requirements
in this rule are new requirements and
hence will result in increased costs for
sex offenders and registration
jurisdictions. The premise is incorrect.
As the regulatory certification explains,
there are no new costs for registration
jurisdictions because their requirements
under SORNA continue to be those
articulated in the previously issued
SORNA Guidelines and SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines. Likewise, for
sex offenders, the requirements
articulated in the rule either appear
expressly in SORNA or have previously
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
been articulated by the Attorney General
in the SORNA Guidelines and SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines. This rule will
not change the registration procedures
of the registration jurisdictions or make
those procedures more time-consuming
or expensive. There is accordingly no
reason to change the relevant regulatory
certification.
(xi) The comment took issue with the
regulatory certification below relating to
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism),
claiming that this rule will have a
significant impact on the relationship
between the states and the Federal
government by creating Federal criminal
penalties for sex offenders who violate
SORNA’s requirements and by creating
funding reductions for states that do not
implement SORNA’s requirements in
their registration programs. The premise
of this comment is incorrect because the
relevant Federal criminal penalties and
funding incentive have existed since
SORNA’s enactment in 2006. See 18
U.S.C. 2250; 34 U.S.C. 20927.
(xii) The comment took issue with the
regulatory certification relating to
subtitle E of title II of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (the
‘‘Congressional Review Act’’), assuming
that the rule will result in novel
requirements to provide and disclose
sex offenders’ employment information
with adverse effects on sex offenders
and their employers. The assumption is
incorrect because the requirements
relating to employment information
have existed for many years in SORNA
and the SORNA Guidelines. See 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(4); 73 FR 38042–43,
38059.
(xiii) With respect to § 72.6(c)(2), the
comment stated that the rule must
forbid a sex offender’s home jurisdiction
from routinely notifying a jurisdiction to
which a registrant plans to travel or
notifying a place of lodging that a
registrant plans to stay there. The
comment argues that such notification
violates a constitutional right to travel
because the destination jurisdictions
may impose unwanted requirements
and restrictions on sex offenders if it is
known they are coming and the
temporary lodging providers may not
allow registered sex offenders to stay on
their properties. However, the rule
requires sex offenders to report
temporary lodging information within
three business days, not in advance. See
§ 72.7(e). If the residence jurisdiction
knows about the sex offender’s travel
plans in advance anyway, and conveys
the information to the destination
jurisdiction or persons therein, no
persuasive reason appears to believe
that doing so is unconstitutional. Be that
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69861
as it may, this rule concerns the
registration requirements for sex
offenders under SORNA, and the
conditions for disclosure of information
about sex offenders by registration
jurisdictions, including temporary
lodging information, are outside of its
scope. The SORNA Guidelines
separately address the conditions for
such disclosure. See 73 FR at 38058–61.
A Comment Proposing 24 Changes in
the Rule
Another comment proposed 24
changes in the rule:
(i) With respect to § 72.1, the
comment stated that subsection (b)
should be revised to allow states to
adopt requirements less stringent than
SORNA without fear of losing federal
funds, or alternatively, clarify the
existing rule that states may adopt
registration requirements that are
substantially similar to SORNA. The
matter is outside the scope of this
rulemaking, which is concerned with
the registration requirements for sex
offenders under SORNA, not the
requirements for registration
jurisdictions. The funding reduction or
reallocation for jurisdictions that do not
substantially implement SORNA is a
statutory matter and cannot be
abrogated by rulemaking. See 34 U.S.C.
20927. The SORNA Guidelines and
SORNA Supplemental Guidelines
explain the substantial implementation
requirement and the funding incentive.
See 73 FR at 38047–48; 76 FR at 1638–
39.
(ii) With respect to § 72.3, the
comment proposed removing the
application of SORNA based on preSORNA offenses, or specifying that
SORNA does not apply to sex offenders
not already required to register prior to
SORNA’s enactment. That conflicts with
Congress’s intent that SORNA apply to
all sex offenders, regardless of when
they were convicted, as discussed above
and in the section-by-section analysis
below.
(iii) With respect to § 72.5, the
comment proposed clarifying that
classification of sex offenders should be
based upon the risk posed by offenses
as represented by tier levels, and
revising subsection (c) to allow
reductions for all levels consistent with
scientific research or recidivism risk.
SORNA specifies the criteria for its tier
classifications and the conditions for
reducing registration periods. See 34
U.S.C. 20911(2)–(4); 20915. These
matters are determined by statute and
cannot be changed by rulemaking.
(iv) With respect to § 72.6(b), relating
to remote communication identifiers,
the comment proposed clarifying that IP
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
69862
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
addresses are not required and proposed
stating that requiring telephone
numbers of ‘‘known associates’’ is a
violation of privacy laws. Section
72.6(b) requires that sex offenders
provide the designations they use for
purposes of routing or self-identification
in internet or telephonic
communications or postings, including
email addresses and telephone numbers.
The specification of required
information, which is similar to a
statutory definition appearing in 34
U.S.C. 20916(e)(2), is sufficiently clear
as drafted, and does not require sex
offenders to provide IP addresses or the
telephone numbers of ‘‘known
associates.’’
(v) With respect to § 72.6(c), relating
to provision of information concerning
residence, temporary lodging,
employment, and school attendance, the
comment proposed providing grace
periods for registration to reflect that
loss of housing and employment can
occur without warning and that it may
take time to locate a replacement.
SORNA and the rule generally allow
three business days to report changes in
residence, employment, and school
attendance, or temporary lodging
information. See § 72.7(c), (e). There is
no need to stipulate a ‘‘grace period’’ for
sex offenders who have nothing within
the scope of § 72.6(c) to report, as may
be the case with a sex offender who has
just lost his residence or job and has no
expectation about where he will be
living or working in the future.
(vi) The comment proposed
eliminating § 72.6(c)(2), relating to
temporary lodging information, or
alternatively, specifying that this
information is not part of the public
record and may not be promulgated by
third-party sites without penalty. The
section-by-section analysis below
explains the justification for requiring
temporary lodging information. The
conditions for public disclosure of
information about sex offenders by
registration jurisdictions, including
temporary lodging information, are
outside the scope of this rulemaking,
which is concerned with the registration
requirements for sex offenders under
SORNA. The SORNA Guidelines
separately address disclosure of sex
offender information by registration
jurisdictions and do not require
registration jurisdictions to disclose sex
offenders’ temporary lodging
information on the public sex offender
websites. See 73 FR at 38059. The
Attorney General has no authority to
create penalties for third-party sites that
disclose sex offenders’ temporary
lodging information.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
(vii) With respect to § 72.6(c)(3),
relating to employment information, the
comment proposed defining place of
employment. Section 72.6(c)(3) is
sufficiently clear as drafted, requiring
the name and address of any place
where a sex offender is or will be an
employee or, for sex offenders who are
or will be employed but with no fixed
place of employment, other information
describing where the sex offender works
or will work with whatever definiteness
is possible under the circumstances. In
referring to place of employment, the
language of § 72.6(c)(3) tracks the
statutory requirement that sex offenders
provide ‘‘[t]he name and address of any
place where the sex offender is an
employee or will be an employee,’’ 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(4).
(viii) With respect to § 72.6(c)(1), the
comment proposed defining residence,
specifically asking how a person
registers a residence address if he is
transient or homeless. The comment
identified no lack of clarity in
§ 72.6(c)(1) that would require further
definition. A person who has no
residence address cannot, of course,
report a residence address. For such
situations, § 72.6(c)(1) provides that ‘‘if
the sex offender has no present or
expected residence address,’’ then the
sex offender must provide ‘‘other
information describing where the sex
offender resides or will reside with
whatever definiteness is possible under
the circumstances.’’
(ix) With respect to § 72.6(d) and (e),
relating to information about
international travel and passports and
immigration documents, the comment
proposed that the rule prohibit this
information from becoming part of the
public record. The conditions for public
disclosure by registration jurisdictions
of information about sex offenders,
including information about their
international travel and their passports
and immigration documents, are outside
the scope of this rulemaking, which
concerns the registration requirements
for sex offenders under SORNA.
Disclosure of sex offender information is
addressed in statutes not implicated by
this rulemaking and in the SORNA
Guidelines and SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines, which do not require
inclusion of international travel,
passport, and immigration document
information on the public sex offender
websites. See 73 FR at 38059.
(x) With respect to § 72.6(f), relating to
vehicle information, the comment asked
for evidence that watercraft and aircraft
have been used in the commission of
sexual offenses to justify the collection
of information about such vehicles. As
the section-by-section analysis below
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
explains, vehicle information may be
useful to help prevent flight, facilitate
investigation, or effect an apprehension
if a sex offender commits new offenses
or violates registration requirements.
This rationale applies to watercraft and
aircraft, as well as land vehicles,
whether or not the particular vehicles
are used in committing sex offenses.
(xi) The comment proposed to specify
in § 72.6(g), relating to information
about professional licenses, that
professional licensing shall not be
denied based on conviction for a sexual
offense unless it has a relationship to
the responsibilities of the job. SORNA
imposes no professional or occupational
disqualifications on sex offenders, and
the matter is outside the scope of this
rulemaking, which concerns the
registration requirements for sex
offenders under SORNA. The Attorney
General has no authority to prohibit or
restrict any professional or occupational
disqualifications for sex offenders that
states may adopt.
(xii) The comment said that § 72.6
should be revised because SORNA does
not require public disclosure of certain
types of information about sex
offenders, mentioning specifically
employer name, information about tier I
sex offenders (not convicted of a
specified offense against a minor), and
non-sexual offenses. The requirements
and exceptions for public disclosure of
information about sex offenders by
registration jurisdictions are outside the
scope of this rulemaking, which
concerns the registration requirements
for sex offenders under SORNA, and
they are not within the subject matter of
§ 72.6, which identifies types of
information sex offenders must provide
for inclusion in the registries. Public
disclosure of sex offender information is
separately addressed in statutes not
germane to this rulemaking and in the
SORNA Guidelines and SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines, which do not
require registration jurisdictions to
include on their public sex offender
websites the types of information
referenced in this part of the comment.
See 73 FR at 38059.
(xiii) The comment said that the
regulations should require accurate
information (about sex offenders),
provide penalties for inaccurate
information or for use of the information
to harm the family of the person
required to register, and discourage
third-party dissemination of
information. These matters are outside
the scope of this rulemaking, which
concerns the registration requirements
for sex offenders under SORNA. SORNA
independently directs registration
jurisdictions to ‘‘include instructions on
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
how to seek correction of information
that an individual contends is
erroneous’’ on their public sex offender
websites. 34 U.S.C. 20920(e). It further
directs that these websites ‘‘shall
include a warning that information on
the site should not be used to
unlawfully injure, harass, or commit a
crime against any individual named in
the registry or residing or working at
any reported address,’’ and that ‘‘[t]he
warning shall note that any such action
could result in civil or criminal
penalties.’’ Id. § 20920(f).
(xiv) With respect to § 72.7(b),
regarding periodic in-person verification
of registration information, the comment
proposed providing an alternative to inperson verification in instances of
natural disasters. The in-person
verification requirement is statutory, see
34 U.S.C. 20918, and cannot be changed
by rulemaking. However, § 72.8(a)(2) in
this rule explains that noncompliance
with SORNA’s requirements (including
its in-person appearance requirements)
may be excused if compliance is
prevented by circumstances beyond the
sex offender’s control, circumstances
that could include the exigencies
presented in natural disasters.
(xv) With respect to § 72.8, regarding
criminal liability under 18 U.S.C. 2250,
the comment proposed (a) providing
that the penalty for state violations shall
be governed by state law, (b) providing
a defense for individuals compliant
with state law, and (c) providing a
defense for persons with out-of-state
convictions who fail to register through
good-faith belief that registration is not
required. These proposed changes are in
part legally incorrect and in part already
covered. Congress enacted SORNA’s
criminal provision to provide Federal
criminal penalties for both state and
Federal sex offenders who violate
SORNA’s requirements under
circumstances supporting Federal
jurisdiction. See 18 U.S.C. 2250(a)–(b);
34 U.S.C. 20911(1), (5)–(8). SORNA’s
requirements apply to both state and
Federal sex offenders regardless of
whether they are paralleled in state law
registration requirements. See Willman,
972 F.3d at 821–24 and § 72.3 in this
rule. As provided in § 72.8(a)(1)(iii), sex
offenders are not subject to liability
under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for violating
registration requirements of which they
are unaware, a limitation that applies
regardless of whether their convictions
are in-state or out-of-state.
(xvi) The comment proposed
establishing that these regulations are
not intended to replace the legislative
process. With respect to the Federal
legislative process, this rule interprets
and implements Congress’s decisions in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
SORNA, see 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), and
does not supplant or replace them.
Rather, the many comments proposing
that this rule abrogate SORNA’s
requirements seek the replacement of
the Federal legislative process with
inconsistent rulemaking. The Attorney
General’s actions in this rulemaking are
not exercises of Federal legislative
power barred by the non-delegation
doctrine, as explained in the section-bysection analysis below. With respect to
state legislative processes, the Attorney
General has no authority over what state
legislatures choose to do and cannot
replace their processes by rulemaking.
(xvii) The comment proposed
providing that (state) judicial precedents
apply in the case of any rules that
conflict with state supreme court
decisions. State judicial decisions
finding state registration laws to be in
conflict with the state constitution do
not affect the validity of the
corresponding requirements under
SORNA. However, SORNA allows such
decisions to be taken into account in
determining whether states have
substantially implemented SORNA’s
requirements in their registration
programs. See 34 U.S.C. 20927(b).
(xviii) The comment proposed
clarification of the process for
classification of out-of-state offenders.
The process by which states classify
out-of-state offenders is outside the
scope of this rulemaking, which
concerns the registration requirements
for sex offenders under SORNA. The
SORNA Guidelines provide guidance to
the states and other registration
jurisdictions regarding the application
of SORNA’s tiering criteria to all sex
offenders, including out-of-state
offenders. See 73 FR at 38052–54.
(xix) The comment proposed
discouraging the inclusion of nonessential information in the public sex
offender websites. The matter is outside
the scope of this rulemaking, which
concerns the registration requirements
for sex offenders under SORNA. Other
provisions of SORNA and the SORNA
Guidelines and SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines address the types of
information that should or should not
be included on the public websites, or
whose inclusion or exclusion is within
the discretion of the registration
jurisdictions. See 34 U.S.C. 20920; 73
FR at 38058–61; 76 FR at 1636–37.
(xx) The comment proposed
encouraging states to provide penalties
for vigilantism. All states already have
criminal penalties for unlawful violence
against persons, including sex offenders,
whether by vigilantes or others, and the
Department of Justice rejects and
condemns all unlawful violence against
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69863
persons, including sex offenders.
SORNA’s standards provide that public
sex offender websites ‘‘shall include a
warning that information on the site
should not be used to unlawfully injure,
harass, or commit a crime against any
individual named in the registry or
residing or working at any reported
address’’ and ‘‘note that any such action
could result in civil or criminal
penalties.’’ 34 U.S.C. 20920(f).
(xxi) The comment proposed
encouraging states to use risk
assessment and other proven methods
for the identification, treatment, and
termination of low-risk offenders. The
criteria for classification of sex offenders
and early termination of registration are
statutory and cannot be changed by
rulemaking. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(2)–(4),
20915. Assessment of sex offenders for
purposes of treatment is outside the
scope of this rulemaking, which
concerns the registration requirements
for sex offenders under SORNA.
(xxii) The comment proposed
discouraging states from utilizing
residency restrictions or other proximity
restrictions. SORNA does not prescribe
or encourage residency or other
proximity restrictions, and the matter is
outside the scope of this rulemaking,
which concerns the registration
requirements for sex offenders under
SORNA.
(xxiii) The comment proposed
discouraging states from lifetime
registration for all, and instead
recommending adoption of SORNA’s
tiered registration periods as provided
in § 72.5. SORNA’s requirements
generally constitute a floor rather than
a ceiling for state registration programs.
See 73 FR at 38032–35, 38046. Whether
registration jurisdictions choose to
adopt more stringent registration
requirements than SORNA’s minimum
national standards, including longer
registration periods, is a matter within
their discretion. See id. Recommending
that states go no further than SORNA’s
requirements is not necessary for the
purposes of this rulemaking, which
articulates the registration requirements
for sex offenders under SORNA, and the
comment was not persuasive that the
rule should incorporate such a
recommendation. In responding to
public comments of a similar nature, the
SORNA Guidelines noted that ‘‘many
jurisdictions have adopted durational
requirements for registration that . . .
may . . . exceed the . . . SORNA
minimum . . . such as making lifetime
registration the norm in relation to
registrants generally.’’ 73 FR at 38034.
Consequently, ‘‘taking the SORNA
standards as a ceiling . . . would
require many jurisdictions to reduce or
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
69864
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
eliminate requirements that they were
free to adopt . . . and currently apply,’’
which ‘‘is not plausibly the objective of
a law (SORNA) enacted with the general
purpose of strengthening sex offender
registration and notification in the
United States.’’ Id.
(xxiv) The comment proposed
providing that International Megan’s
Law, residency restrictions, and other
regulatory measures only apply for the
duration of registration. International
Megan’s Law added the international
travel reporting requirements of SORNA
and related authorities, appearing in 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(7), (c) and implemented
by §§ 72.6(d), 72.7(f) of this rule. In
common with the other requirements
under SORNA appearing in this rule,
those requirements continue to apply
until the end of the SORNA registration
period. Whether registration
jurisdictions choose to impose such
requirements for longer periods than the
registration periods prescribed by
SORNA is within their discretion. See
73 FR at 38046. Residency restrictions,
where they exist, are based on the laws
of the jurisdictions that choose to adopt
them. SORNA does not require such
restrictions, the Attorney General has no
authority to specify their duration, and
they are outside the scope of this
rulemaking.
A Comment Proposing Five Changes in
the Rule
Another comment proposed five
changes in the rule:
(i) The comment stated that the
Attorney General should disclose all ‘‘ex
parte contacts’’ with United States
Attorneys because, the comment
asserted, some parts of the rule (such as
§ 72.3) appear to be targeting common
defenses raised by sex offenders accused
of failing to register and hence may be
the product of litigation strategy rather
than reasoned rulemaking. The
comment reflects a false opposition
between addressing issues that have
arisen in litigation and reasoned
rulemaking. This rulemaking carries out
a statutory directive to the Attorney
General to issue regulations to interpret
and implement SORNA, see 34 U.S.C.
20912(b), in furtherance of SORNA’s
objective of protecting the public from
sex offenders by establishing a
comprehensive national system for their
registration, see id. 20901. In carrying
out this responsibility, the Attorney
General reasonably resolves issues and
problems that have arisen in SORNA
implementation, including those arising
in the enforcement of SORNA by means
of the criminal provision Congress has
enacted for that purpose, 18 U.S.C.
2250.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
(ii) The comment said that the rule,
for fair notice reasons, should specify
that other uncodified legislative rules
imposing registration duties on sex
offenders under SORNA are abrogated.
The comment did not identify
‘‘legislative rules’’ outside of these
regulations that it was referring to or
provide a persuasive reason for
declaring that such rules are abrogated.
This rule encompasses all current
regulations issued by the Attorney
General under SORNA. The other
SORNA-related final documents the
Attorney General has published in the
Federal Register, listed in the
‘‘rulemaking history’’ section above, are
guidelines that provide guidance and
assistance to registration jurisdictions in
implementing SORNA. Section
72.8(a)(1)(iii) in this rule moots fair
notice concerns by explaining that sex
offenders are not held liable under 18
U.S.C. 2250 for violating registration
requirements of which they are
unaware.
(iii) The comment said that the
Attorney General, for Tenth
Amendment and fair notice reasons,
should specify that states are permitted
to impose less stringent registration
requirements than SORNA’s standards
and that registrants fully comply with
SORNA by complying with state
registration laws even if the state has
not implemented SORNA. However,
this rule articulates SORNA’s
registration requirements for sex
offenders; it does not compel states to
do anything. States are afforded a
funding incentive to substantially
implement SORNA’s requirements in
their registration programs, a statutory
condition that cannot be abrogated by
rulemaking. See 34 U.S.C. 20927.
Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in this rule moots
fair notice concerns by explaining that
sex offenders are not held liable under
18 U.S.C. 2250 for violating
requirements of which they are
unaware, and § 72.8(a)(2) further
explains that noncompliance with
SORNA may be excused where
compliance was prevented by a state’s
failure to carry out a necessary
complementary role. The notion that sex
offenders need only comply with
SORNA’s registration requirements
where state law imposes the same
requirements is incorrect as a matter of
law. See Willman, 972 F.3d at 821–24.
(iv) Section 72.5(b) in the rule states
that the registration period of a sex
offender sentenced to imprisonment
begins to run when he is released from
custody. The comment asserted to the
contrary that a sex offender’s
registration period begins to run when
the registrant is convicted, for three
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
reasons. First, the comment argued that
there is no reason to suspend the
running of the registration period during
the sex offender’s initial confinement.
This argument is question-begging
because it assumes that the registration
period is already running before the sex
offender is released. Second, the
comment asserted that § 72.5(b)’s
interpretation of SORNA is implausible
because it would mean that a sex
offender must initially register before
the registration period has begun, given
the requirement of 34 U.S.C. 20913(b)(1)
that a sex offender initially register
before completing his sentence of
imprisonment. However, SORNA
logically requires that a sex offender be
advised of his registration obligations
and initially registered shortly before
his release from custody, see 34 U.S.C.
20919(a), because that is the point at
which he is about to be released into the
community and the post-release
tracking and notification functions of
sex offender registration are initially
implicated. See 73 FR at 38062–63.
Third, the comment asserted that
running the registration period from
conviction provides a readily
ascertainable starting date and is
consistent with Congress’s decision to
base sex offenders’ registration duties on
the crimes for which they have been
convicted. Running the registration
period from release likewise provides a
definite starting point that is consistent
with SORNA’s tiering criteria for sex
offenders and the associated registration
periods. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(2)–(4),
20915. The section-by-section analysis
below provides further explanation
regarding the commencement of sex
offenders’ registration periods under
SORNA and why the starting point is
release from custody for an imprisoned
offender.
(v) The comment argued that § 72.7(f)
violates a constitutional right to travel
by requiring sex offenders to report
intended international travel at least 21
days in advance because, the comment
asserted, it makes registrants liable for
felony convictions every time they
travel without providing 21 days’
notice. It further asserted that Congress’s
failure to incorporate the 21-day notice
requirement into International Megan’s
Law evinces a congressional judgment
that the requirement is unnecessary and
unduly burdensome, and that advance
notice of less than 21 days may afford
Federal authorities adequate time to
notify destination countries. However,
the Attorney General initially adopted
the 21-day advance notice requirement
in the SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines, reflecting the judgment of
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
the responsible Federal agencies
concerning the time needed for effective
notification regarding international
travel by sex offenders, but recognizing
that exceptions to that requirement may
be necessary and appropriate in certain
circumstances. See 76 FR at 1637–38.
This rule follows the same approach,
generally requiring 21-day advance
notice, but allowing later notice when a
sex offender does not anticipate a trip
abroad that far in advance. See
§§ 72.6(d), 72.7(f), 72.8(a)(2) Ex. 3, and
the accompanying discussion in the
section-by-section analysis below. The
analysis explains that ‘‘[t]he 21-day
advance notice requirement is designed
to provide relevant agencies . . .
sufficient lead time for any investigation
or inquiry that may be warranted
relating to the sex offender’s
international travel, and for notification
of U.S. and foreign authorities in
destination countries, prior to the sex
offender’s arrival in a destination
country.’’ In SORNA, as amended by
International Megan’s Law, Congress
empowered the Attorney General to
prescribe ‘‘time and manner
requirements’’ in conformity with
which sex offenders must ‘‘provide and
update information . . . relating to
intended travel outside the United
States,’’ 34 U.S.C. 20914(c), which
Congress would not logically have done
if it deemed unnecessary and unduly
burdensome the 21-day advance notice
requirement that the Attorney General
had already adopted in the SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines. The comment
provided no persuasive reason to
believe that any constitutional right is
violated by these aspects of the rule,
which are within the scope of the
express authority Congress has given the
Attorney General to prescribe timing
requirements for reporting international
travel.
A Comment Alleging Four
Inconsistencies With SORNA
A comment argued that this rule is
inconsistent with SORNA in four
respects.
(i) The comment claimed that § 72.3,
providing in part that sex offenders
must comply with SORNA’s
requirements regardless of whether a
jurisdiction has substantially
implemented those requirements, is
inconsistent with SORNA because
Congress did not intend to punish sex
offenders for jurisdictions’ failures to
implement SORNA. However, § 72.3
accurately states the law. See Willman,
972 F.3d at 821–24. Section
72.8(a)(1)(iii) explains that sex offenders
are not held liable for violating
requirements under SORNA of which
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
they are unaware, and § 72.8(a)(2)
explains that failure to comply with
SORNA’s requirements may be excused
where compliance is prevented by a
jurisdiction’s failure to carry out a
necessary complementary role. There is
accordingly no punishment of sex
offenders based on jurisdictions’
shortcomings.
(ii) The comment claimed that
§§ 72.7(d) and 72.6(c), in requiring
departure-notification by sex offenders
in certain circumstances, conflict with
34 U.S.C. 20913(c), as interpreted by the
Supreme Court in Nichols, 136 S. Ct. at
1117–19. However, as the section-bysection analysis below explains, the
departure-notification provisions of the
rule are premised on powers of the
Attorney General under other provisions
of SORNA and are consistent with
Nichols.
(iii) The comment claimed that
§ 72.7(c) is inconsistent with SORNA in
requiring that a sex offender must report
changes in residence, employment, and
school attendance in the jurisdictions in
which they occur, because 34 U.S.C.
20913(c) only requires that a sex
offender appear in person and report the
change ‘‘in at least 1 jurisdiction
involved’’ without further specification.
However, the section-by-section
analysis below explains that the
specification of the relevant jurisdiction
is within the Attorney General’s
authority under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b) and
34 U.S.C. 20914(c) to interpret and
implement SORNA and to prescribe the
manner in which sex offenders must
provide and update information
required by SORNA. The analysis also
explains the justification for this
specification based on the purposes of
SORNA’s in-person appearance
requirements.
(iv) The comment proposed amending
§ 72.7(e) and (f), which require sex
offenders to report to the residence
jurisdiction information relating to
remote communication identifiers,
temporary lodging, vehicles, and
international travel. Specifically, the
comment said that sex offenders should
be permitted to report such changes to
any ‘‘involved jurisdiction,’’ as
referenced in 34 U.S.C. 20913(c). In
support of the proposed amendment,
the comment argued that, for example,
it could be nearly impossible for an
offender who works long hours at a job
in State A, but lives in State B, to report
the required information in State B
during normal business hours without
having to miss work. However, § 72.7(e)
and (f) do not require the reporting of
information through in-person
appearances, but rather allow reporting
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69865
by whatever means the jurisdiction
allows, such as an email or phone call.
Other Comments
Other comments proposed additional
changes to this rule, beyond those
discussed above, but did not provide
persuasive reasons for such changes.
The proposals put forward by one or
more commenters included the
following:
A comment proposed that
§ 72.6(c)(2)’s requirement that a sex
offender report temporary lodging when
away from his residence for seven or
more days should be changed to require
such reporting only when the sex
offender is away from his residence for
14 or more days. The reasons given by
the comment were that vacation time is
generally two weeks and, for families on
opposite coasts, it is impossible to drive
across the country, visit, and drive back
within seven days. However, § 72.6(c)(2)
does not prohibit sex offenders from
traveling away from their residences for
any amount of time. It just requires
them to report to the residence
jurisdiction within three business days
lodging away from their residences for
seven or more days. See § 72.7(e).
A comment objected to the
requirement of § 72.6(f) that sex
offenders provide information as to
where any vehicle owned or operated by
the sex offender is habitually parked,
docked, or otherwise kept, on the
ground that innocent people should not
get dragged onto the registry because
they allow a registered sex offender to
visit. However, the referenced provision
in § 72.6(f) does not require sex
offenders to report the identities or
addresses of people they visit. It just
requires reporting where they habitually
keep their vehicles. As the section-bysection analysis below explains, this
information may be useful to help
prevent flight, facilitate investigation, or
effect an apprehension if a sex offender
commits new offenses or violates
registration requirements.
A comment objected that the rule
would burden sex offenders who
telework or telelearn with employers or
schools in remote jurisdictions by
requiring them to travel to those
jurisdictions to register or report
changes. However, § 72.4 in the rule
requires a sex offender to register and
keep the registration current in each
jurisdiction in which the offender
resides, is an employee, or is a student,
and § 72.7(c) requires a sex offender to
report a change in residence,
employment, or school attendance
through in-person appearance in the
relevant jurisdiction. These provisions
implement statutory requirements
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
69866
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
appearing in 34 U.S.C. 20913(a), (c).
They do not expand the range of
jurisdictions in which sex offenders are
required to register or report changes
beyond those identified in the statute. In
particular, §§ 72.4 and 72.7(c) do not
require a sex offender to register or
appear in a jurisdiction in which he has
a telework or telelearning connection
but no physical presence. See 73 FR at
38062. Nor do they require a sex
offender to register in a jurisdiction in
which he has some work-related
presence but in which he does not
regularly work or have a fixed place of
employment. See id.
A comment requested clarification
regarding (i) the state offenses for which
SORNA requires registration and (ii)
whether SORNA requires sex offenders
to register in states whose own laws do
not require registration by those
offenders. Regarding the first question,
SORNA identifies the types of offenses,
including state offenses, for which it
requires registration, see 34 U.S.C.
20911(1), (5)–(8), and the SORNA
Guidelines provide further explanation,
see 73 FR at 38050–52. If a sex offender
does not know that he is required to
register because he is unaware that the
offense for which he was convicted gave
rise to a duty to register, then he is not
held liable under 18 U.S.C. 2250, which
only penalizes violations of known
registration obligations, as explained in
§ 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in this rule. Regarding
the second question, SORNA’s
registration requirements are
independent of state law registration
requirements, see Willman, 972 F.3d at
821–24, but a sex offender’s
noncompliance with SORNA may be
excused where compliance is prevented
by a state’s failure to carry out a
necessary complementary role, as
explained in § 72.8(a)(2) in this rule.
A comment proposed that the rule
clarify Federal prosecutorial priorities
with respect to SORNA violations in
jurisdictions that have not implemented
SORNA, suggesting that Federal
prosecution be limited or forgone where
the jurisdiction’s laws do not impose
the same requirements. However, as
§ 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in this rule explains, sex
offenders are not held liable under 18
U.S.C. 2250 for violation of registration
requirements of which they are
unaware, and, as § 72.8(a)(2) explains,
noncompliance with SORNA may be
excused where compliance is prevented
by circumstances beyond their control,
such as a jurisdiction’s failure to carry
out a necessary complementary role.
The comment was not persuasive that
the Department of Justice should adopt
a policy of not prosecuting sex offenders
for violating known registration
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
obligations under SORNA, where
nothing prevented those offenders from
complying, just because the registration
jurisdiction had not implemented some
aspects of SORNA in its registration
program. Federal prosecutorial priorities
are usually not established by
regulation, and addressing prosecutorial
priorities is not necessary for purposes
of this rulemaking, which articulates sex
offenders’ registration requirements
under SORNA.
A comment asserted that § 72.3’s
application of SORNA’s requirements to
all sex offenders, regardless of when
they were convicted, may violate due
process because, at the state level,
courts may determine whether
particular sex offenders are required to
register. Section 72.3 addresses the
general scope of SORNA’s application,
not whether particular sex offenders are
required to register under state law, and
raises no due process issue.
A comment proposed adding to § 72.5
a provision requiring that a sex offender
be removed from the sex offender
registry if he receives a pardon, and that
the offense be expunged from all court
and law enforcement records. However,
only pardons on the ground of
innocence terminate registration
obligations under SORNA, see 73 FR at
38050, and the Attorney General has no
authority to require registration
jurisdictions to expunge the records of
sex offenders who are pardoned in those
jurisdictions.
A comment asserted that § 72.6(g),
which requires sex offenders to report
professional licenses, is vague and not
required by SORNA. Section 72.6 is
sufficiently definite, requiring sex
offenders to provide information
concerning licensing that authorizes
them to engage in an occupation or
carry out a trade or business. Adopting
this requirement is an exercise of the
Attorney General’s authority under 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(8) to require sex
offenders to provide other information,
beyond that expressly described in the
statute. The section-by-section analysis
below explains that information
concerning professional licenses may be
helpful in locating a registered sex
offender if he absconds, may provide a
basis for notifying the responsible
licensing authority if the offender’s
conviction of a sex offense may affect
his eligibility for the license, and may
be useful in crosschecking the accuracy
and completeness of other information
the offender is required to provide, e.g.,
if the sex offender is licensed to engage
in a certain occupation but does not
provide name and address information
for a place of employment as required
by 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(4).
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
A comment proposed generally
replacing SORNA’s in-person reporting
requirements with reporting through
remote communication technology.
SORNA’s requirements to report or
verify certain information through inperson appearances are statutory and
cannot be abrogated by rulemaking. See
34 U.S.C. 20913(c), 20918.
A comment proposed expanding the
language in the rule about
circumstances that may excuse
noncompliance with SORNA’s
requirements to include public health
emergencies and natural disasters.
However, § 72.8(a)(2) in the rule makes
clear that any uncontrollable
circumstances preventing compliance
with SORNA, regardless of their
character, may excuse noncompliance
under the conditions stated in 18 U.S.C.
2250(c).
A comment proposed encouraging
registration jurisdictions to conform
their registration regulations to SORNA
to achieve uniformity across
jurisdictions. Jurisdictions are
encouraged to conform their registration
requirements to SORNA’s minimum
national standards by the funding
incentive of 34 U.S.C. 20927 and the
extensive guidance and assistance that
the Department of Justice provides to
SORNA implementation through the
SMART Office. See 76 FR at 1638. As
§ 72.1 in this rule notes, the adoption of
more extensive or stringent
requirements is within the discretion of
the registration jurisdictions. The matter
is explained in the section-by-section
analysis below and in the SORNA
Guidelines, see 73 FR at 38032–35,
38046. Making recommendations
regarding jurisdictions’ adoption of
measures not required by SORNA is
outside the scope of this rulemaking,
which articulates SORNA’s registration
requirements for sex offenders.
Section-by-Section Analysis
The present rule expands part 72 of
title 28 of the Code of Federal
Regulations to provide a full statement
of the registration requirements for sex
offenders under SORNA. It revises the
statement of purpose and definitional
sections in 28 CFR 72.1 and 72.2. It
maintains the existing provision in 28
CFR 72.3 stating that SORNA’s
requirements apply to all sex offenders,
regardless of when they were convicted,
and incorporates additional language in
§ 72.3 to reinforce that point. It also
adds to part 72 provisions—§§ 72.4
through 72.8—articulating where sex
offenders must register, how long they
must register, what information they
must provide, how they must register
and keep their registrations current to
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
satisfy SORNA’s requirements, and the
liability they face for violations,
following SORNA’s express
requirements and the prior articulation
of standards for these matters in the
SORNA Guidelines and the SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines.
Section 72.1—Purpose
Section 72.1(a) states part 72’s
purpose to specify SORNA’s registration
requirements and their scope of
application. It further notes that the
Attorney General has the authority
pursuant to provisions of SORNA to
specify these requirements and their
applicability as provided in part 72.
Section 72.1(b) states that part 72 does
not preempt or limit any obligations of
or requirements relating to sex offenders
under other laws, rules, or policies. It
further notes that states and other
governmental entities may prescribe
requirements, with which sex offenders
must comply, that are more extensive or
stringent than those prescribed by
SORNA. This reflects the fact that
SORNA provides minimum national
standards for sex offender registration. It
is intended to establish a floor rather
than a ceiling for the registration
programs of states and other
jurisdictions, which can prescribe
registration requirements binding on sex
offenders under their own laws
independent of SORNA. Jurisdictions
accordingly are free to adopt more
stringent or extensive registration
requirements for sex offenders than
those set forth in this part, including
more stringent or extensive
requirements regarding where, when,
and how long sex offenders must
register, what information they must
provide, and what they must do to keep
their registrations current. See 73 FR at
38032–35, 38046.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Section 72.2—Definitions
Section 72.2 states that terms used in
part 72 have the same meaning as in
SORNA. Hence, for example, references
in the part to registration ‘‘jurisdictions’’
mean the 50 states, the District of
Columbia, the five principal U.S.
territories, and Indian tribes qualifying
under 34 U.S.C. 20929. See id.
20911(10); 73 FR at 38045, 38048.
Likewise, where the part uses such
terms as sex offender (and tiers thereof),
sex offense, convicted or conviction, sex
offender registry, student, employee or
employment, and reside or residence,
the meaning is the same as in SORNA.
See 34 U.S.C. 20911(1)–(9), (11)–(13); 73
FR at 38050–57, 38061–62.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
Section 72.3—Applicability of the Sex
Offender Registration and Notification
Act
Section 72.3 carries forward in
substance current 28 CFR 72.3, which
states that SORNA’s requirements apply
to all sex offenders, including those
whose sex offense convictions predate
SORNA’s enactment. This section was
initially adopted on February 28, 2007,
and amended on December 29, 2010.
The section and its rationale are
explained further in the interim and
final rulemakings that adopted it. See 72
FR 8894; 75 FR 81849.
Section 72.3, and its modification by
this rulemaking, are constitutionally
sound. In Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84
(2003), the Supreme Court upheld the
retroactive application of sex offender
registration requirements against an ex
post facto challenge, in reviewing a state
registration system whose major features
paralleled SORNA’s in many ways. The
commonalities between SORNA and the
state registration program upheld in
Smith include required registration
before release from imprisonment;
provision of name, address,
employment, vehicle, and other
registration information; continued
registration and periodic verification of
registration information for at least 15
years; lifetime registration and quarterly
verification for certain registrants
convicted of aggravated or multiple sex
offenses; and public internet posting of
information about registrants. See id. at
90–91. The Federal courts have
consistently rejected ex post facto
challenges to SORNA itself. See, e.g.,
United States v. Felts, 674 F.3d 599,
605–06 (6th Cir. 2012).
Section 72.3 also is not premised on
any constitutionally impermissible
delegation of legislative authority to the
executive branch of government.
Congress intended that SORNA apply to
all sex offenders, regardless of when
they were convicted. See Reynolds, 565
U.S. at 442–45; id. at 448–49 & n.
(Scalia, J., dissenting) (agreeing that
Congress intended for SORNA to apply
to all sex offenders). Congress
authorized the Attorney General to
specify the applicability of SORNA’s
requirements to sex offenders with preSORNA and pre-SORNAimplementation convictions, see 34
U.S.C. 20913(d), in order to effectuate
that intent while enabling the Attorney
General to address transitional issues
presented in integrating the existing sex
offender population into SORNA’s
comprehensive nationwide registration
system. See Reynolds, 565 U.S. at 440–
42; 72 FR at 8895–97; 73 FR at 38035–
36, 38046, 38063–64; 75 FR at 81850–
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69867
52. In adopting § 72.3, the Attorney
General implemented the relevant
legislative policy—that SORNA’s
requirements should apply to all sex
offenders—to the maximum, having
found no reason to delay or qualify its
implementation. Consequently, as an
articulation of a legislative policy
embodied in SORNA, the issuance of
§ 72.3 pursuant to 34 U.S.C. 20913(d)
involved no exercise of legislative
authority and did not contravene the
non-delegation doctrine. See Gundy,
139 S. Ct. at 2123–30 (plurality
opinion); id. at 2130–31 (Alito, J.,
concurring in the judgment); id., Brief
for the United States at 22–38.
Moreover, regardless of any question
concerning the validity of 34 U.S.C.
20913(d), § 72.3 is adequately supported
on the basis of the Attorney General’s
authority to issue guidelines and
regulations to interpret and implement
SORNA, appearing in 34 U.S.C.
20912(b). In § 72.3, the Attorney General
interpreted SORNA as intended by
Congress to apply to all sex offenders
regardless of when they were
convicted—an interpretation endorsed
by the Supreme Court, see Reynolds,
565 U.S. at 440–45; see also Gundy, 139
S. Ct. at 2123–31—and he implemented
that legislative policy by embodying it
in a clearly stated rule.
The same considerations apply to the
amended version of § 72.3 adopted here,
which effectuates more reliably the
legislative policy judgment that
SORNA’s requirements should apply to
all sex offenders by restating the current
rule with additional specificity, but
which involves no change in substance.
In comparison with the current
formulation of § 72.3, this rule adds a
second sentence stating that (i) all sex
offenders must comply with all
requirements of SORNA, regardless of
when they were convicted; (ii) this is so
regardless of whether a registration
jurisdiction has substantially
implemented SORNA or any particular
SORNA requirement; and (iii) this is so
regardless of whether a particular
requirement or class of sex offenders is
mentioned in examples in the rules or
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General.
The first part of the added sentence
reiterates § 72.3’s specification of
SORNA’s applicability to all sex
offenders in the form of an affirmative
direction to sex offenders, and it states
explicitly that all of SORNA’s
requirements so apply.
The added sentence further states that
the registration duties SORNA
prescribes for sex offenders are not
conditional on registration jurisdictions’
having adopted SORNA’s requirements
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
69868
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
in their own registration laws or
policies. For example, SORNA requires
sex offenders to register in the states
(and other registration jurisdictions) in
which they reside, work, or attend
school. See 34 U.S.C. 20913(a). All of
the states have sex offender registration
programs, which were initially
established long before the enactment of
SORNA. Hence, sex offenders are able to
register in these existing state programs.
The fact that a particular state has not
modified its registration program at this
time to incorporate the full range of
SORNA requirements does not prevent
a sex offender required to register by
SORNA from registering in the state or
excuse a failure to do so. See, e.g., Felts,
674 F.3d at 603–05.
The same principle applies in
situations in which a jurisdiction’s law
does not track or incorporate a
particular SORNA requirement affecting
a sex offender. Consider a situation of
this nature in which SORNA requires a
sex offender to register but the law of
the state in which he resides does not.
This may occur, for example, because
state law does not require registration
based on the particular sex offense for
which the offender was convicted, or
because state law requires registration
by sex offenders for shorter periods of
time than SORNA, or because state law
does not apply its registration
requirements ‘‘retroactively’’ as broadly
as § 72.3 applies SORNA’s requirements
to sex offenders with pre-SORNA
convictions. Notwithstanding the
absence of a parallel state law, the
registration authorities in the state may
be willing to register the sex offender
because Federal law (i.e., SORNA)
requires him to register. Cf. Doe v.
Keathley, 290 S.W.3d 719 (Mo. 2009)
(state constitutional prohibition of
retrospective laws does not preclude
registration based on SORNA). If the
state registration authorities are willing
to register the sex offender, he is not
relieved of the duty to register merely
because state law does not track the
Federal law registration requirement.
Hence, sex offenders can be held
liable for violating any requirement
stated in this rule, regardless of when
they were convicted, and regardless of
whether the jurisdiction in which the
violation occurs has adopted the
requirement in its own law. This does
not mean, however, that SORNA
unfairly holds sex offenders liable for
failing to comply with its requirements,
where the requirement is unknown to
the sex offender or impossible for him
to carry out. Cf. Felts, 674 F.3d at 605
(noting concern). Federal enforcement
of SORNA’s requirements occurs
primarily through SORNA’s criminal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
provision, 18 U.S.C. 2250. That
provision makes it a Federal crime for
a person required to register by SORNA
to knowingly fail to register or update a
registration as required by SORNA
under circumstances supporting Federal
jurisdiction, such as conviction of a
Federal sex offense or interstate or
foreign travel. As discussed below,
section 2250 holds sex offenders liable
only for violations of known registration
obligations, and it excuses failures to
comply with SORNA under certain
conditions if the noncompliance results
from circumstances beyond the sex
offenders’ control.
Consider first the concern that sex
offenders may lack notice regarding
registration obligations. Under the
procedures prescribed by SORNA, and
under standard procedures that have
generally been adopted by registration
jurisdictions whether or not they have
implemented SORNA’s requirements,
the registration of sex offenders
normally involves (i) informing sex
offenders of their registration duties, (ii)
obtaining from sex offenders signed
acknowledgments confirming receipt of
that information, and (iii) having sex
offenders provide the required
registration information. See 34 U.S.C.
20919(a); 73 FR at 38062–63.
Registration procedures of this nature
inform sex offenders of what they must
do, and the acknowledgments obtained
from them provide evidence that they
were so informed. See 76 FR at 1638. If
a jurisdiction that registers a sex
offender has not fully revised its
processes for conformity to SORNA,
then it may not tell the sex offender
about some of the registration
requirements imposed by SORNA, such
as those that the jurisdiction has not
incorporated in its own laws. If the
jurisdiction fails to inform a sex
offender about some of SORNA’s
registration requirements, the sex
offender then does not know about some
of his registration obligations under
SORNA based on the information
received from the jurisdiction, and may
not learn of them from other sources. In
such cases, the possibility of liability
under 18 U.S.C. 2250 continues to be
limited to cases in which a sex offender
‘‘knowingly fails to register or update a
registration as required by [SORNA].’’
The limitation to ‘‘knowing[ ]’’
violations provides a safeguard against
liability based on unwitting violations
of SORNA requirements of which a sex
offender was not aware. Section
72.8(a)(1)(iii) of this rule, and the
accompanying discussion below,
provide further explanation about the
limitation of liability under 18 U.S.C.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2250 to cases involving violation of
known registration obligations.
The second concern about fairness
involves situations in which a sex
offender has failed to do something
SORNA requires because it is
impossible for him to do so. For
example, as noted above, a jurisdiction
with laws that do not require
registration based on the particular
offense for which a sex offender was
convicted may nevertheless be willing
to register him in light of his Federal
law (SORNA) registration obligation.
But alternatively, the jurisdiction’s law
or practice may constrain its registration
personnel to register only sex offenders
whom its own laws require to register.
In such a case, it is impossible for the
sex offender to register in that
jurisdiction, though subject to a
registration duty under SORNA. This is
so because registration is by its nature
a two-party transaction, involving a sex
offender’s providing information about
where he resides and other matters as
required, and acceptance of that
information by the jurisdiction for
inclusion in the sex offender registry. If
the jurisdiction is unwilling to carry out
its side of the transaction, then the sex
offender cannot register.
Concerns of this nature are also
addressed in SORNA’s criminal
provision, 18 U.S.C. 2250. Subsection
(c) of section 2250 provides an
affirmative defense to liability for
SORNA violations if ‘‘(1) uncontrollable
circumstances prevented the individual
from complying; (2) the individual did
not contribute to the creation of such
circumstances in reckless disregard of
the requirement to comply; and (3) the
individual complied as soon as such
circumstances ceased to exist.’’ A
registration jurisdiction’s law or practice
that precludes registration of a sex
offender, as described above, is a
circumstance that the sex offender
cannot control and to which he did not
contribute, so he cannot be held liable
for failure to register with that
jurisdiction as SORNA requires.
The defense in section 2250(c) comes
with the proviso that the defendant
must comply with SORNA ‘‘as soon as
[the preventing] circumstances cease[ ]
to exist.’’ For example, consider the case
posed above of a jurisdiction that
refuses to register sex offenders based
on a particular offense for which
SORNA requires registration, so that a
sex offender residing in the jurisdiction
who was convicted of that offense
cannot register there. Suppose that the
jurisdiction later progresses in its
implementation of SORNA and becomes
willing to register offenders who have
been convicted for that sex offense. In
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
light of the proviso, the sex offender’s
obligation to register revives once the
jurisdiction becomes willing to register
him. That is fair, because the
circumstance preventing his compliance
with the SORNA registration
requirement no longer exists.
Section 72.8(a)(2) of this rule, and the
accompanying discussion below,
provide further explanation about the
contours of the impossibility defense
under 18 U.S.C. 2250(c).
Returning to the text of § 72.3, the
added sentence states at the end that sex
offenders must comply with SORNA’s
requirements ‘‘regardless of whether any
particular requirement or class of sex
offenders is mentioned in examples in
this regulation or in other regulations or
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General.’’ In conjunction with the
earlier statement in the provision that
all sex offenders must comply with all
SORNA requirements, the added
language responds to a judicial decision
that did not give full effect to the
current regulation.
Section 72.3, as currently formulated,
states that SORNA’s ‘‘requirements . . .
apply to all sex offenders,’’ exercising
the Attorney General’s ‘‘authority to
specify the applicability of the
requirements of [SORNA] to sex
offenders convicted before the
enactment of [SORNA] or its
implementation in a particular
jurisdiction.’’ 34 U.S.C. 20913(d); see
Reynolds, 565 U.S. at 441–45
(explaining Congress’s decision to give
the Attorney General authority to apply
SORNA’s requirements to sex offenders
with pre-SORNA convictions).
Nevertheless, in United States v.
DeJarnette, 741 F.3d 971 (9th Cir. 2013),
the court believed that the Attorney
General had not made all of SORNA’s
requirements applicable to all sex
offenders. The case concerned the
applicability of SORNA’s requirement
that a sex offender register initially in
the jurisdiction in which he is
convicted, if it differs from his residence
jurisdiction, see 34 U.S.C. 20913(a)
(second sentence), where the sex
offender’s conviction predated SORNA’s
enactment. Notwithstanding 28 CFR
72.3, the court concluded that the
Attorney General had not made this
SORNA requirement applicable to sex
offenders with pre-SORNA convictions,
if they were already subject to state law
registration requirements. DeJarnette,
741 F.3d at 982. The decision was
largely premised on the fact that the
particular SORNA requirement at issue
was not mentioned in relation to that
particular class of sex offenders in the
examples of sex offenders subject to
SORNA’s requirements in 28 CFR 72.3
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
and the SORNA Guidelines. DeJarnette,
741 F.3d at 976–80.
The sentence added to § 72.3 by this
rulemaking will foreclose future
decisions of this nature and ensure that
§ 72.3’s application of SORNA’s
requirements to all sex offenders is
given effect consistently.
The rule includes one further change
in § 72.3, affecting the first example in
the provision. The example as currently
formulated describes a sex offender
convicted in 1990 and released
following imprisonment in 2007, and
says that the sex offender is subject to
SORNA’s requirements. In Reynolds, the
Supreme Court held that SORNA’s
requirements did not apply to sex
offenders with pre-SORNA convictions
prior to the Attorney General’s exercise
of the authority under 34 U.S.C.
20913(d) to specify SORNA’s
applicability to those offenders. 565
U.S. at 434–35. It follows that SORNA’s
requirements did not apply to such sex
offenders before the Attorney General’s
original issuance of 28 CFR 72.3 on
February 28, 2007. Example 1 in § 72.3
might be misunderstood as suggesting
the contrary, i.e., that a sex offender
with a pre-SORNA conviction released
from imprisonment at any time in 2007
was immediately subject to SORNA’s
requirements. Hence, to avoid any
possible inconsistency or apparent
inconsistency with the Supreme Court’s
decision in Reynolds, the rule changes
the example by substituting a later year
for 2007.
Section 72.4—Where Sex Offenders
Must Register
Section 72.4 tracks SORNA’s express
requirement that a sex offender must
register and keep the registration current
in each jurisdiction in which the sex
offender resides, is an employee, or is a
student, and must also initially register
in the jurisdiction in which the offender
was convicted if that jurisdiction differs
from the jurisdiction of residence. See
34 U.S.C. 20913(a); 73 FR at 38061–62.
Section 72.5—How Long Sex Offenders
Must Register
Section 72.5 sets out SORNA’s
requirements regarding the duration of
registration. SORNA classifies sex
offenders into three ‘‘tiers,’’ based on
the nature and seriousness of their sex
offenses and their histories of
recidivism. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(2)–(4);
73 FR at 38052–54. The tier in which a
sex offender falls affects how long the
offender must continue to register under
SORNA. The required registration
periods are generally 15 years for a tier
I sex offender, 25 years for a tier II sex
offender, and life for a tier III sex
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69869
offender. See 34 U.S.C. 20915(a); 73 FR
at 38068. Paragraph (a) in § 72.5
reproduces these requirements.
Paragraph (a) of § 72.5 provides an
exception ‘‘when the sex offender is in
custody or civilly committed,’’
incorporating in substance an express
proviso appearing in SORNA, 34 U.S.C.
20915(a). The exception and proviso
mean that SORNA does not require a
sex offender to carry out its processes
for registering or updating registrations
during subsequent periods of
confinement, e.g., when imprisoned
because of conviction for some other
offense following his release from
imprisonment for the sex offense. This
reflects that ‘‘the SORNA procedures for
keeping up the registration . . .
generally presuppose the case of a sex
offender who is free in the community’’
and that ‘‘[w]here a sex offender is
confined, the public is protected against
the risk of his reoffending in a more
direct way, and more certain means are
available for tracking his whereabouts.’’
73 FR at 38068. However, registration
jurisdictions may see incremental value
in requiring sex offenders to carry out
their processes for registering and
updating registrations during
subsequent confinement and are free to
do so, though SORNA does not require
it.
The proviso relating to custody or
civil commitment does not pertain to or
limit SORNA’s requirement that initial
registration is to occur while the sex
offender is still imprisoned following
conviction for the predicate sex offense.
See 34 U.S.C. 20913(b)(1), 20919(a).
Rather, as indicated above, it affects a
sex offender’s registration obligations
under SORNA if he is later
reincarcerated after his release. The
proviso relating to custody or civil
commitment also does not mean that the
running of the SORNA registration
period is suspended during such
subsequent confinement, and does not
otherwise affect the commencement or
duration of a sex offender’s registration
period under SORNA.
For example, consider a sex offender,
released in 2010 from imprisonment for
a sex offense conviction, whom SORNA
requires to register for 25 years as a tier
II sex offender, and suppose the sex
offender is subsequently convicted
during the registration period for
committing a robbery and imprisoned
for three years for the latter offense.
SORNA’s registration requirement for
that sex offender terminates in 2035,
although he was incarcerated for three
years of the 25-year SORNA registration
period. Sex offenders should keep in
mind, however, that their registration
jurisdictions are free to impose more
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
69870
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
extensive requirements than SORNA,
including longer registration periods.
Hence, the basic registration period
under the law of a jurisdiction in which
such a sex offender is registered may be
longer than 25 years. And even if the
basic registration period under the
jurisdiction’s law is the same as the 25
years required by SORNA, the
jurisdiction may choose not to credit the
three years the sex offender spent in
prison for the robbery towards the
running of the registration period under
state law. See 73 FR at 38032–35, 38046,
38068. Expiration of the SORNA
registration period accordingly does not
obviate the need for sex offenders to
check with registration jurisdictions
whether they remain subject to
registration requirements under the
jurisdictions’ laws.
As provided in paragraph (b) of § 72.5,
the registration period under SORNA
begins to run upon release from
imprisonment following a sex offense
conviction, or at the time of sentencing
for a sex offense where imprisonment
does not ensue. See 73 FR at 38068. The
sex offender’s release from
imprisonment, which marks the start of
the registration period for an
incarcerated sex offender, may occur
later than the end of the sentence
imposed for the sex offense itself. For
example, suppose that a sex offender is
convicted for a fatal sexual assault upon
a victim, resulting in a sentence of three
years of imprisonment for the sexual
assault and a concurrent or consecutive
sentence of 25 years of imprisonment
for murder. Or consider a case in which
a sex offender is sentenced to three
years of imprisonment for a sexual
assault and at a later time he is
sentenced to 25 years of imprisonment
for an unrelated murder, while still
imprisoned for the sex offense. Or
suppose that a sex offender is already
serving a 25-year prison term for an
unrelated murder, when he is sentenced
to three years of imprisonment for a
sexual assault. In all such cases, the
registration period under SORNA starts
to run when the sex offender actually
completes his imprisonment and is
released. It does not start to run while
the sex offender is still imprisoned but
has completed the portion of the
sentence attributable to the sex offense.
This conclusion follows from the
general design and specific
requirements of SORNA’s registration
procedures. SORNA provides that
incarcerated sex offenders must initially
register ‘‘before completing a sentence
of imprisonment with respect to the
[registration] offense.’’ 34 U.S.C.
20913(b)(1). SORNA further states that
the correlative responsibilities of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
registration officials in effecting the
initial registration are to be carried out
‘‘shortly before release of the sex
offender from custody.’’ Id. 20919(a);
see 73 FR at 38063 (explaining
requirement to register shortly before
release from custody). Thereafter, sex
offenders must ‘‘keep the registration[s]
current’’ for specified periods of time,
depending on their ‘‘tier[s].’’ 34 U.S.C.
20915(a). In light of these provisions,
the registration period is logically
understood as being framed at the start
by the release from custody and at the
end by the termination of the specified
time period.
Considering specifically cases in
which a sex offender is serving an
aggregate prison term for multiple
crimes, 34 U.S.C. 20913(b)(1) requires
registration ‘‘before completing a
sentence of imprisonment with respect
to the offense giving rise to the
registration requirement.’’ (Emphasis
added). It does not require registration
‘‘before completing a sentence of
imprisonment for the offense giving rise
to the registration requirement.’’ The
broader ‘‘with respect to’’ language is
best understood to mean that the
relevant prison term under section
20913(b)(1) is not the specific sentence
imposed for the predicate sex offense
alone, but rather is the full related
sentence of imprisonment, including
any prison time imposed for other
crimes. The corresponding language in
section 20919(a) supports this
understanding, requiring initial
registration of the sex offender ‘‘shortly
before release of the sex offender from
custody.’’ This language does not signify
that initial registration is to occur when
the sex offender is about to complete the
portion of an aggregate sentence
attributable specifically to the sex
offense, though the sex offender will
remain in custody because he is serving
additional time for another offense or
offenses. Rather, by its terms, section
20919(a) contemplates that initial
registration will occur shortly before the
sex offender is actually released, and
section 20913(b)(1) must be understood
in the same way, because section
20913(b)(1) and section 20919(a)
describe the same transaction (initial
registration) from different perspectives.
For example, consider the case of a
sex offender convicted and sentenced
for a fatal sexual assault, resulting in a
three-year prison term for the sexual
assault and a concurrent or consecutive
25-year sentence for murder. Suppose
that the sexual assault involved was a
sexual contact offense against an adult
victim, resulting in the classification of
the sex offender as a tier I sex offender
and a registration period of 15 years. See
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
34 U.S.C. 20911(2)–(4), 20915(a)(1). If
the registration period started to run at
the end of the first three years of the sex
offender’s incarceration, then the 15year registration period would expire
long before the sex offender’s release,
because of the extension of his
imprisonment by the murder sentence.
This result would be at odds with
section 20919(a)’s direction that sex
offenders are to be initially registered
‘‘shortly before release . . . from
custody,’’ because the sex offender’s
registration obligation under SORNA
would be a thing of the past by that
time, and also with the requirements
under sections 20913 and 20915(a)(1)
that the sex offender register and keep
the registration current for 15 years,
because his registration period would be
over before he registered in the first
place.
In addition to the inconsistency with
the statutory provisions discussed
above, starting the running of the
registration period upon the conclusion
of the portion of a sentence attributable
to the registration offense would result
in arbitrary differences in registration
requirements, depending on fortuities in
the structuring of criminal sentences or
their descriptions in judgments. For
example, considering again the case of
a fatal sexual assault, suppose that the
resulting sentence involves a three-year
prison term for the sexual assault,
followed by a consecutive 25-year
prison term for murder. As discussed
above, the assumed 15-year registration
period for the sexual assault would then
run out long before the sex offender’s
release, and he would never have to
register at all. But suppose the sentence
is cast instead as a 25-year prison term
for murder, followed by a consecutive
three-year prison term for the sexual
assault. The completion of the prison
term for the sexual assault would then
coincide with the sex offender’s release
from prison, and he would have to
register and keep the registration current
for 15 years. Because the ordering of the
sexual assault and murder sentences has
no relevance to the public safety
purposes served by sex offender
registration, the discrepancy between
the two cases as to resulting registration
requirements would be irrational. For
this reason as well, the registration
period under SORNA starts to run when
the sex offender is actually released, and
not at an earlier time upon completion
of the portion of an aggregate sentence
specifically attributable to the predicate
sex offense.
By way of comparison, an offender’s
term of post-imprisonment supervised
release for a sex offense does not start
to run until he is released from prison,
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
including in cases in which the
offender’s release is delayed by his
serving additional prison time for
another offense or offenses. This is not
unfair or illogical; it rationally reflects
the nature of supervision as a measure
designed for overseeing and managing
offenders following their release. While
sex offender registration differs from
supervision in being a non-punitive,
civil regulatory measure, see, e.g.,
Smith, 538 U.S. at 92–106; Felts, 674
F.3d at 605–06, it is likewise concerned
with the post-release treatment of sex
offenders in the community. Hence, as
with periods of supervision, it is
rational for an offender’s registration
period for a sex offense to begin to run
when he is released from prison,
including in cases in which the
offender’s release is delayed by his
serving additional prison time for other
criminal conduct. This reflects the
nature of registration as a measure
designed for tracking and monitoring
sex offenders following their release.
The principle that the registration
period under SORNA commences on
release also applies to cases in which
the sex offender is not imprisoned for
the sex offense per se but is imprisoned
because of conviction for another
offense. For example, suppose that a sex
offender is convicted of sexually
assaulting and robbing a victim,
resulting in a sentence of probation for
the sexual assault and a sentence of five
years of imprisonment for the robbery.
Considering the relevant statutory
provisions, section 20913(b)(2) makes
applicable an alternative time for initial
registration—three business days after
sentencing—only ‘‘if the sex offender is
not sentenced to a term of
imprisonment.’’ Correspondingly,
section 20919(a) provides for initial
registration immediately after
sentencing, rather than shortly before
release from custody, only ‘‘if the sex
offender is not in custody.’’ These
provisions, by their terms, do not apply
to a sex offender who remains in
custody, though on the basis of an
offense other than the predicate sex
offense. Hence, cases of this nature must
fall under the requirement of sections
20913(b)(1) and 20919(a) to effect initial
registration shortly before the sex
offender’s release, and the consequences
are the same as in the cases discussed
above involving aggregate prison terms
for the registration offense and other
crimes. Where the sex offender receives
a non-incarcerative sentence for the
registration offense and a prison term
for another offense, the registration
period starts upon the sex offender’s
release, so that once registered and out
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
in the community he must keep the
registration current for the full
registration period specified in 34
U.S.C. 20915, and not just for a
truncated period reduced by his
incarceration for another offense.
In terms of underlying policy,
registration is by definition concerned
with tracking sex offenders in the
community following their release. See
73 FR at 38044–45. The tiers and the
associated registration periods under
SORNA reflect categorical legislative
judgments as to how long sex offenders
should be tracked following release for
public safety purposes. These judgments
do not come into play until the sex
offender is released. When that happens
may be affected by many factors—such
as the length of the prison term the sex
offender receives for the sex offense;
whether the sex offender makes parole
(in a state system having parole) or gets
good-conduct credit; whether the
jurisdiction adopts an early release
program because of prison crowding;
and whether the sex offender gets
additional prison time because of
sentencing for other offenses, related or
unrelated to the sex offense.
Whatever the reasons may be, it is
logical to start a post-release tracking
regime—i.e., registration—when the sex
offender is actually released. Initial
registration is to occur ‘‘shortly before’’
that, as 34 U.S.C. 20919(a) requires, ‘‘in
light of the underlying objectives of
ensuring that sex offenders have their
registration obligations in mind when
they are released, and avoiding
situations in which registration
information changes significantly
between the time the initial registration
procedures are carried out and the time
the offender is released.’’ 73 FR at
38063.
Hence, the registration period under
SORNA starts to run when a sex
offender is released from imprisonment,
and not at an earlier time when the
specific sentence for the registration
offense has been served, if the two times
differ. This follows from the features of
the statutory provisions discussed
above, from the absurdities entailed by
a different interpretation, and from the
basic character of registration as a postrelease tracking measure. To the extent
that there might be any uncertainty or
argument to the contrary, the Attorney
General in this rule exercises his
authority under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b) to
interpret and implement SORNA’s
provisions affecting the duration of
registration in the manner stated.
Paragraph (c) in § 72.5 sets out
SORNA’s reduction of its registration
period for certain sex offenders who
maintain a ‘‘clean record’’ in accordance
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69871
with statutory standards. The specific
‘‘clean record’’ conditions are that the
sex offender not be convicted of any
felony or any sex offense, successfully
complete any period of supervision, and
successfully complete an appropriate
sex offender treatment program
(certified by a registration jurisdiction or
the Attorney General). The SORNA
registration period is reduced by five
years for a tier I sex offender who
maintains a clean record for 10 years,
and reduced to the period for which the
clean record is maintained for a tier III
sex offender required to register on the
basis of a juvenile delinquency
adjudication who maintains a clean
record for 25 years. See 34 U.S.C.
20915(a), (b); 73 FR at 38068–69.
Section 72.6—Information Sex
Offenders Must Provide
Section 72.6 sets out the registration
information sex offenders must provide.
Much of the specified information is
expressly required by SORNA, see 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(1)–(7), and the
remainder reflects SORNA’s direction
that sex offenders must provide ‘‘[a]ny
other information required by the
Attorney General,’’ id. 20914(a)(8).
In general terms, the required
information comprises (i) name, birth
date, and Social Security number; (ii)
remote communication identifiers
(including email addresses and
telephone numbers); (iii) information
about places of residence, nonresidential lodging, employment, and
school attendance; (iv) international
travel; (v) passports and immigration
documents; (vi) vehicle information;
and (vii) professional licenses. By
providing basic information about who
a sex offender is, where he is, how he
gets around, and what he is authorized
to do, these requirements implement
SORNA and further its public safety
objectives.
Paragraph (a)(1) of § 72.6 requires that
a sex offender provide his name,
including any alias, which is an express
SORNA requirement. See 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(1); 73 FR at 38055.E0.
Paragraph (a)(2) of § 72.6 requires a
sex offender to provide date of birth
information, a requirement the Attorney
General has adopted in the SORNA
Guidelines and this rule because date of
birth information is regularly utilized as
part of an individual’s basic
identification information and hence is
of value in helping to identify, track,
and locate registered sex offenders. The
paragraph requires that any date that the
sex offender uses as his or her purported
date of birth must be provided, in
addition to the actual date of birth,
because sex offenders may, for example,
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
69872
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
provide false date of birth information
in seeking employment that would
provide access to children or other
potential victims. See 73 FR at 38057.
Paragraph (a)(3) of § 72.6 requires that
a sex offender provide his Social
Security number, which is an express
SORNA requirement. See 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(2). The paragraph further
requires provision of any number that a
sex offender uses as his purported
Social Security number. The Attorney
General has adopted the latter
requirement—already appearing in the
SORNA Guidelines in 2008—because
sex offenders may, for example, attempt
to use false Social Security numbers in
seeking employment that would provide
access to children or other potential
victims. See 73 FR at 38055.
Paragraph (b) of § 72.6 requires a sex
offender to provide all remote
communication identifiers that he uses
in internet or telephonic
communications or postings, including
email addresses and telephone numbers.
A provision of the Keeping the internet
Devoid of Sexual Predators Act of 2008
(KIDS Act), Public Law 110–400,
directed the Attorney General to use the
authority under paragraph (7) of 34
U.S.C. 20914(a) [now designated
paragraph (8)] to require sex offenders to
provide internet identifiers. The
Attorney General has previously
exercised that authority to require the
specified information in the SORNA
Guidelines. See 34 U.S.C. 20916(a); 73
FR at 38055; 76 FR at 1637. The
Attorney General has exercised the same
authority to require telephone
numbers—a requirement also already
appearing in the SORNA Guidelines—
for a number of reasons, including
facilitating communication between
registration personnel and sex offenders,
and addressing the potential use of
telephonic communication by sex
offenders in efforts to contact or lure
potential victims. See 73 FR at 38055.
Paragraph (c)(1) of § 72.6 requires a
sex offender to provide residence
address information or other residence
location information if the sex offender
lacks a residence address. Providing
residence address information is an
express SORNA requirement. See 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(3). In the SORNA
Guidelines, and now in this rule, the
Attorney General has adopted the
requirement to provide other residence
location information for sex offenders
who do not have residence addresses,
such as homeless sex offenders or sex
offenders living in rural areas that lack
street addresses, because having this
type of location information serves the
same public safety purposes as knowing
the whereabouts of sex offenders with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
definite residence addresses. See 73 FR
at 38055–56, 38061–62.
Paragraph (c)(2) of § 72.6 requires a
sex offender to provide information
about temporary lodging while away
from his residence for seven or more
days. In the SORNA Guidelines, and
now in this rule, the Attorney General
has adopted this requirement because
sex offenders may reoffend at locations
away from the places in which they
have a permanent or long-term
presence, and indeed could be
encouraged to do so to the extent that
information about their places of
residence is available to the authorities
but information is lacking concerning
their temporary lodgings elsewhere. The
benefits of having this information
include facilitating the successful
investigation of crimes committed by
sex offenders while away from their
normal places of residence and
discouraging sex offenders from
committing crimes in such
circumstances. See 73 FR at 38056.
Paragraph (c)(3) of § 72.6 requires a
sex offender to provide employer name
and address information, or other
employment location information if the
sex offender lacks a fixed place of
employment. Providing employer name
and address information is an express
SORNA requirement. See 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(4). The Attorney General has
adopted, in the SORNA Guidelines and
this rule, the requirement to provide
other employment location information
for sex offenders who work but do not
have fixed places of employment—e.g.,
a long-haul trucker whose ‘‘workplace’’
is roads and highways throughout the
country, a self-employed handyman
who works out of his home and does
repair or home improvement work at
other people’s homes, or a person who
frequents sites that contractors visit to
obtain day labor and works for any
contractor who hires him on a given
day. The Attorney General has adopted
this requirement because knowing
where such sex offenders are in the
course of employment serves the same
public safety purposes as knowing the
whereabouts of sex offenders who work
at fixed locations. See 73 FR at 38056,
38062.
Paragraph (c)(4) of § 72.6 requires a
sex offender to provide the name and
address of any place where the sex
offender is or will be a student, an
express SORNA requirement. See 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(5); 73 FR at 38056–57,
38062.
Paragraph (d) of § 72.6 requires a sex
offender to provide information about
intended travel outside of the United
States. This is an express SORNA
requirement, added by International
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Megan’s Law. See 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7);
Public Law 114–119, sec. 6(a)(1). A
related provision in § 72.7(f) of this rule
requires sex offenders to report
international travel information at least
21 days in advance. Exercising the
general authority under paragraph (8) of
34 U.S.C. 20914(a) [then designated
paragraph (7)] to expand the required
range of registration information, the
Attorney General initially adopted these
requirements in the SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines, see 76 FR at
1637–38, even before the enactment of
International Megan’s Law, for a number
of reasons:
(i) Realizing SORNA’s public safety
objectives requires that registered sex
offenders be effectively tracked as they
leave and return to the United States,
and that other sex offenders who enter
the United States be identified, so that
domestic registration and law
enforcement authorities know about the
sex offenders’ presence in the United
States and can ensure that they register
while here as SORNA requires. To that
end, SORNA directs the Attorney
General to establish and maintain a
system for informing relevant
registration jurisdictions about persons
entering the United States whom
SORNA requires to register. See 34
U.S.C. 20930. Sections 72.6(d) and
72.7(f) of this rule are part of that
system, requiring registered sex
offenders to inform their registration
jurisdictions about travel abroad,
including information that encompasses
both their departure from and return to
the United States. Beyond this direct
benefit, learning about sex offenders’
entry into the United States may depend
on notice from the authorities of the
countries they come from—authorities
who may expect reciprocal notice about
sex offenders traveling to their countries
from the United States. Having U.S. sex
offenders inform their registration
jurisdictions of travel abroad provides
information that is used by U.S.
authorities, including the U.S. Marshals
Service and INTERPOL WashingtonU.S. National Central Bureau, to notify
the authorities in the destination
countries about sex offenders traveling
to their areas. These foreign authorities
may in return advise U.S. authorities
about sex offenders traveling to the
United States from their countries,
facilitating the notification of domestic
registration jurisdictions about the sex
offenders’ presence that section 20930
contemplates. See 73 FR at 38066; 76 FR
at 1637.
(ii) Sex offenders traveling abroad
may remain subject in some respects to
U.S. jurisdiction, e.g., because a sex
offender intends to go to an overseas
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
U.S. military base or to work as or for
a U.S. military contractor in another
country. In such cases, the intended
travel of the sex offender may implicate
the same public safety concerns in
relation to communities abroad for
which the United States has
responsibility as it does in relation to
communities within the United States.
See 73 FR at 38067; 76 FR at 1637–38.
(iii) More broadly, for a sex offender
disposed to reoffend, it may be
attractive to travel to foreign countries
where law enforcement is weaker (or
perceived to be weaker), where sexually
trafficked children or other vulnerable
victims may be more readily available,
and where the registration and
notification measures to which the sex
offender is subject in the United States
are inoperative. The United States does
not wish to export the public safety
threat posed by its sex offenders to other
countries. Requiring sex offenders in the
United States to inform their registration
jurisdictions about international travel
provides a basis for notifying foreign
authorities in the destination countries,
which helps to reduce the resulting
risks. If these sex offenders do reoffend
in other countries, the resulting human
harm to victims is no less because it
occurs in a foreign country, and the
United States’ image and foreign
relations interests may be adversely
affected as well. Sex offenders from the
United States who commit sex offenses
in other countries may be subject to
prosecution under various Federal laws,
which reflect the United States’ policy
of, and commitment to, combating the
commission of crimes of sexual abuse
and exploitation internationally as well
as domestically. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C.
1591, 2251(c), 2260, 2423. Consistent
tracking of international travel by sex
offenders helps to deter and prevent
such crimes, and to facilitate their
investigation if they occur.
Beyond creating a general
requirement to report travel outside of
the United States at least 21 days in
advance, the SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines authorized the requirement
of more definite information about
international travel plans. 76 FR at 1638
(additional directions may be issued by
the SMART Office ‘‘concerning the
information to be required in sex
offenders’ reports of intended
international travel, such as information
concerning expected itinerary,
departure and return dates, and means
and purpose of travel’’); see Notice of
International Travel, https://
smart.ojp.gov/sorna/noticeinternational-travel (providing such
directions). Section 72.6(d) in this rule
specifically directs sex offenders
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
traveling abroad to report information
regarding any anticipated itinerary,
dates and places of departure, arrival, or
return, carrier and flight numbers for air
travel, destination countries and address
or contact information therein, and
means and purpose of travel. More
detailed information of this type is
needed because notice only that a sex
offender intends to travel somewhere
outside of the United States at some
time three weeks or more in the future
would be inadequate to realize the
objectives of international tracking of
sex offenders—objectives that include,
as discussed above, notification as
appropriate of U.S. and foreign
authorities in destination countries for
public safety purposes, preventing and
detecting the offenders’ commission of
sex offenses in other countries, and
reliably tracking sex offenders as they
leave and enter the United States for
purposes of enforcing registration
requirements. Requiring the specified
information concerning international
travel is justified by its value in
furthering these objectives. See 73 FR at
38066–67; 76 FR at 1634, 1637–38.
Congress endorsed these objectives
and the stated conclusion in
International Megan’s Law, whose
purposes include ‘‘[t]o protect children
and others from sexual abuse and
exploitation, including sex trafficking
and sex tourism, by providing advance
notice of intended travel by registered
sex offenders outside the United States
to the government of the country of
destination [and] requesting foreign
governments to notify the United States
when a known sex offender is seeking
to enter the United States.’’ Public Law
114–119; see 162 Cong. Rec. H390–94
(Feb. 1, 2016) (explanation in House
floor debate on passage). As noted
above, the measures adopted by
International Megan’s Law in support of
its international notification system
include an express requirement that sex
offenders report intended international
travel, making this requirement a
permanent feature of SORNA that exists
independently of regulatory action. See
34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7); Public Law 114–
119, sec. 6(a)(1).
Section 72.6(d) in this rule follows the
new SORNA travel information
provision added by International
Megan’s Law, which states that sex
offenders must provide ‘‘[i]nformation
relating to intended travel of the sex
offender outside the United States,
including any anticipated dates and
places of departure, arrival, or return,
carrier and flight numbers for air travel,
destination country and address or other
contact information therein, means and
purpose of travel, and any other
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69873
itinerary or other travel-related
information required by the Attorney
General.’’ 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7). A sex
offender must report all anticipated
information in these categories in
relation to both the United States and
destination countries as the language of
§ 72.6(d) makes clear. For example, a
sex offender who is leaving the United
States must report any anticipated date
and place of departure from the United
States, and also any anticipated date
and place of return to the United States
if the sex offender expects to return.
Likewise, with respect to each foreign
country to be visited, the sex offender
must report any anticipated date and
place of arrival in that country and any
anticipated date and place of departure
from that country.
Paragraph (e) of § 72.6 requires a sex
offender to provide information
concerning any passport or passports he
has, and concerning documents
establishing his immigration status if he
is an alien. The passports referenced in
the paragraph include passports of all
types and nationalities, not just U.S.
passports. Where the sex offender has
multiple passports, as may occur, for
example, in cases involving dual
citizenship, the paragraph’s reference to
‘‘each passport’’ the sex offender has
means that the sex offender must report
all of his passports. The Attorney
General has included information about
passports and immigration documents
as required registration information in
the SORNA Guidelines and in this rule
because having this type of information
in the registries serves various purposes.
These include locating and
apprehending registrants who may
attempt to leave the United States after
committing new sex offenses or
registration violations, facilitating the
tracking and identification of registrants
who leave the United States but later
reenter while still required to register,
see 34 U.S.C. 20930, and crosschecking
the accuracy and completeness of other
types of information that registrants are
required to provide—e.g., if immigration
documents show that an alien registrant
is in the United States on a student visa
but the registrant fails to provide school
attendance information as required by
34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(5). See 73 FR at
38056.
Paragraph (f) of § 72.6 requires a sex
offender to provide information
concerning any vehicle owned or
operated by the sex offender,
information concerning the license plate
number or other registration number or
identifier for the vehicle, and
information as to where the vehicle is
habitually kept. In part, the paragraph
reflects the express SORNA requirement
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
69874
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
in 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(6) that a sex
offender provide ‘‘[t]he license plate
number and a description of any vehicle
owned or operated by the sex offender.’’
This includes, in addition to vehicles
registered to the sex offender, any
vehicle that the sex offender regularly
drives, either for personal use or in the
course of employment. See 73 FR at
38057. The remainder of the paragraph
reflects the Attorney General’s
requirement (previously adopted in the
SORNA Guidelines) of additional
vehicle-related information that serves
similar purposes or may be useful to
help prevent flight, facilitate
investigation, or effect an apprehension
if the sex offender commits new
offenses or violates registration
requirements. See id.
Paragraph (g) of § 72.6 requires a sex
offender to provide information
concerning all licensing of the offender
that authorizes him to engage in an
occupation or carry out a trade or
business. The Attorney General has
adopted this requirement, initially in
the SORNA Guidelines and now in this
rule, because information of this type (i)
may be helpful in locating a registered
sex offender if he absconds, (ii) may
provide a basis for notifying the
responsible licensing authority if the
offender’s conviction of a sex offense
may affect his eligibility for the license,
and (iii) may be useful in crosschecking
the accuracy and completeness of other
information the offender is required to
provide—e.g., if the sex offender is
licensed to engage in a certain
occupation but does not provide name
or place of employment information as
required by 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(4) for
such an occupation. See 73 FR at 38056.
Section 72.7—How Sex Offenders Must
Register and Keep the Registration
Current
SORNA requires sex offenders to
register and keep the registrations
current in jurisdictions in which they
reside, work, or attend school. Section
72.7 sets out the procedures for doing
so, addressing the timing requirements
for registering and updating
registrations, the jurisdictions to which
changes in registration information must
be reported, and the means for reporting
such changes. In general terms, the
section requires (i) initial registration
before release from imprisonment, or
within three business days after
sentencing if the sex offender is not
imprisoned; (ii) periodic in-person
appearances to verify and update the
registration information; (iii) reporting
of changes in name, residence,
employment, or school attendance; (iv)
reporting of intended departure or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
termination of residence, employment,
or school attendance in a jurisdiction;
(v) reporting of changes relating to
remote communication identifiers,
temporary lodging information, and
vehicle information; (vi) reporting of
international travel; and (vii)
compliance with a jurisdiction’s rules if
a sex offender has not complied with
the normal time and manner
specifications for carrying out a SORNA
requirement.
The requirements articulated in this
section in part appear expressly in
SORNA and in part reflect exercises of
the powers SORNA confers on the
Attorney General to further specify its
requirements. The authorities relied on
include the following:
SORNA directs the Attorney General
to issue rules and guidelines to
‘‘interpret and implement’’ its
provisions, which include the basic
requirement that each sex offender must
‘‘register . . . and keep the registration
current.’’ 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(a).
Previously in the SORNA Guidelines,
see 73 FR at 38062–67, and now in this
rule, the Attorney General interprets his
authority to ‘‘interpret and implement’’
SORNA as including the authority to
articulate a comprehensive, gap-free set
of procedural requirements for
registering and updating registrations.
Authority of this nature is needed to
implement SORNA in conformity with
the legislative objective of protecting the
public from sex offenders by
establishing a comprehensive national
system for their registration. 34 U.S.C.
20901. Beyond the public safety need,
this understanding of section 20912(b)
‘‘takes Congress to have filled potential
lacunae’’ in SORNA in a manner
consistent with fair notice concerns,
empowering the Attorney General to
eliminate any ‘‘vagueness and
uncertainty’’ regarding how sex
offenders are to comply with SORNA’s
registration requirements. Reynolds, 565
U.S. at 441–42.
The Attorney General’s authority to
interpret and implement SORNA
includes in particular the authority to
adopt additional specifications
regarding the time and manner in which
its requirements must be carried out.
For example, SORNA expressly requires
that sex offenders must appear in person
to report changes of name, residence,
employment, and student status within
three business days of such changes. 34
U.S.C. 20913(c). But SORNA does not
expressly require the reporting within a
particular timeframe of changes relating
to other types of registration information
that also bear directly and importantly
on the identification, tracking, and
location of sex offenders. These include
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
remote communication identifiers (such
as email addresses), temporary lodging
information, international travel
information, and vehicle information, as
described in § 72.6(b), (c)(2), (d), and (f)
of this rule. Absent a requirement that
changes in these types of information be
reported promptly, the information in
the registries about these matters could
become seriously out of date, which
would in turn impair SORNA’s basic
objective of effectively tracking and
locating sex offenders in the community
following their release. See 73 FR at
38044–45, 38066–67. The Attorney
General accordingly has adopted
definite timing requirements for
reporting changes in these types of
information, previously in the
guidelines for SORNA implementation,
and now in § 72.7(e)–(f) in this rule.
Adopting such rules reflects an
exercise of the Attorney General’s
authority to ‘‘interpret and implement’’
SORNA, 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), and more
specifically to interpret and implement
SORNA’s requirement that sex offenders
must ‘‘keep the registration current,’’ id.
20913(a). While the heading of
subsection (c) of section 20913 is
‘‘[k]eeping the registration current,’’ the
heading only signifies that the
subsection sets out an updating rule for
the most basic types of registration
information. It does not signify that
nothing more can be required to keep
the registration current. The contrary is
evident from section 20915(a), which
specifies the duration of required
registration under SORNA. Section
20915(a) uses the same terminology,
stating that a sex offender ‘‘shall keep
the registration current’’ for the relevant
period of time. Obviously, in providing
that a sex offender must ‘‘keep the
registration current’’ for a specified
period, section 20915(a) defines the
period of time during which a sex
offender must continue to comply with
all of SORNA’s requirements, given the
absence of any other provision in
SORNA specifying how long sex
offenders must comply with its various
requirements. Among other
consequences, this means that sex
offenders must appear in person
periodically to verify and update their
registration information, as required by
section 20918, for the specified period
of time—not just that they must report
changes in name, residence,
employment, and school attendance, as
provided in section 20913(c), for the
specified period of time. That
consideration alone demonstrates that
section 20913(c) does not exhaust
SORNA’s requirements for ‘‘keep[ing]
the registration current.’’
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Regarding other matters, such as
changes in registration information
relating to remote communication
identifiers, temporary lodging, vehicles,
and international travel, the Attorney
General has understood the authority to
interpret and implement SORNA’s
requirement to keep the registration
current as including the authority to
adopt specific time and manner
requirements for the reporting of such
changes. Congress ratified this
understanding in the KIDS Act. In that
Act, Congress provided that (i) ‘‘[t]he
Attorney General, using the authority
provided in [34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(8)],
shall require that each sex offender
provide to the sex offender registry
those internet identifiers the sex
offender uses or will use’’ and (ii) ‘‘[t]he
Attorney General, using the authority
provided in [34 U.S.C. 20912(b)], shall
specify the time and manner for keeping
current information required to be
provided under this section.’’ 34 U.S.C.
20916(a)–(b). Notably, Congress did not
find it necessary to make new grants of
authority to the Attorney General for
these purposes and instead directed the
Attorney General to utilize the preexisting authorities under SORNA to
require internet identifier information
and specify the time and manner for
keeping it current. This confirms that
the section 20912(b) authority includes
the authority to adopt additional time
and manner requirements in the rules
and guidelines the Attorney General
issues.
SORNA directs sex offenders to
provide for inclusion in the sex offender
registry several expressly described
types of registration information and, in
addition, ‘‘[a]ny other information
required by the Attorney General.’’ Id.
20914(a)(8). The section 20914(a)(8)
authority underlies the specification of
required types of registration
information in § 72.6 in this rule beyond
those expressly set forth in section
20914(a)(1)–(7). The section 20914(a)(8)
authority also provides an additional,
independent legal basis for various
requirements in § 72.7, including a
number of timing rules it incorporates.
In relation to some types of required
registration information under this rule,
which may be based wholly or in part
on the exercise of the Attorney General’s
authority under section 20914(a)(8), a
timing requirement is inherent in the
nature of the information that must be
reported. This is true of the requirement
under § 72.7(d) to report if a sex
offender will be commencing residence,
employment, or school attendance
elsewhere or will be terminating
residence, employment, or school
attendance in a jurisdiction. It is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
likewise true of the requirement under
§ 72.7(f) to report intended international
travel. Because these provisions
constitute requirements to report
present intentions regarding expected
future actions, the information they
require necessarily must be reported in
advance of the expected actions.
Section 20914(a)(8) also provides an
additional, independent legal basis for
more specific timeframe requirements
appearing in § 72.7 of this rule. One of
these requirements is that intended
international travel is to be reported at
least 21 days in advance of the travel,
as provided in § 72.7(f). In substance,
this is a requirement that a sex offender
report to the residence jurisdiction an
intention to travel outside of the United
States at some time 21 days or more in
the future. Viewing the expected timing
of the travel as an aspect of the required
information, it is within the Attorney
General’s authority under 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(8) to require sex offenders to
provide ‘‘[a]ny other information’’—and
following the adoption of section
20914(a)(7) by International Megan’s
Law, within the Attorney General’s
more specific authority under the latter
provision to require ‘‘any other . . .
travel-related information.’’ Essentially
the same point applies to the rule’s
specification that sex offenders must
report within three business days
changes relating to certain types of
registration information the Attorney
General has required. Section 72.7(e)
directs reporting of changes in
information within that timeframe
relating to remote communication
identifiers, temporary lodging, and
vehicles. Viewed as requirements to
report the information that certain
actions or occurrences have taken place
within the preceding three business
days, these requirements are within the
Attorney General’s authority under 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(8).
Turning to another SORNA provision
supporting time and manner
requirements, 34 U.S.C. 20913(d)
authorizes the Attorney General to
specify the applicability of SORNA’s
requirements to sex offenders convicted
before the enactment of SORNA 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).’’ The crossreferenced ‘‘subsection (b)’’ is the
SORNA provision that requires sex
offenders to register initially before
release from imprisonment, or within
three business days of sentencing if the
sex offender is not imprisoned. As
discussed below in connection with
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69875
§ 72.7(a)(2) of this rule, sex offenders
released from Federal or military
custody and sex offenders convicted in
foreign countries generally are unable to
register prior to release. The section
20913(d) authority to prescribe
registration rules for sex offenders
‘‘unable to comply with subsection (b)’’
accordingly provides one of the legal
bases for the alternative timing rules in
§ 72.7(a)(2), which direct registration by
sex offenders in the affected classes
within three business days of entering a
jurisdiction following release.
The authorities described above—
under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(d), and
20914(a)(8)—provided the basis for the
Attorney General’s adoption of time and
manner specifications for complying
with SORNA’s registration requirements
in previously issued guidelines under
SORNA. More recently, International
Megan’s Law added an express, general
grant of authority to the Attorney
General to make such specifications.
The relevant provision is 34 U.S.C.
20914(c), which reads as follows: ‘‘(c)
TIME AND MANNER.—A sex offender
shall provide and update information
required under subsection (a), including
information relating to intended travel
outside the United States required
under paragraph (7) of that subsection,
in conformity with any time and
manner requirements prescribed by the
Attorney General.’’
The cross-referenced ‘‘subsection (a)’’
is SORNA’s list of all the registration
information that sex offenders must
provide. Hence, the new section
20914(c) requires sex offenders to
comply with the Attorney General’s
directions regarding the time and
manner for providing and updating all
registration information required by
SORNA. In addition to empowering the
Attorney General to specify the time and
manner for reporting particular types of
registration information, this provision
enables the Attorney General to specify
the time and manner for registration.
This is so because registration on the
part of a sex offender consists of
providing required registration
information to the registration
jurisdiction for inclusion in the sex
offender registry. Given that the
Attorney General has the authority
under section 20914(c) to specify the
time and manner for a sex offender’s
provision of each required type of
registration information, it follows that
the Attorney General has the authority
under section 20914(c) to specify the
time and manner for a sex offender’s
provision of the required types of
information collectively, which
constitutes registration under SORNA.
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
69876
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Paragraph (a)—Initial Registration
Paragraph (a)(1) of § 72.7 tracks
SORNA’s general rule that a sex
offender must initially register—that is,
register for the first time based on a sex
offense conviction—before release from
imprisonment, or within three business
days of sentencing in case of a nonincarcerative sentence. See 34 U.S.C.
20913(b) (initial registration by sex
offenders); id. 20919(a) (complementary
duties of registration officials); 73 FR at
38062–65 (related explanation in
guidelines).
Paragraph (a)(2)(i) of § 72.7 addresses
the situation of sex offenders who are
released from Federal or military
custody or sentenced for a Federal or
military sex offense. There is no
separate Federal registration program for
such offenders. Hence, Federal
authorities cannot register these
offenders prior to their release from
custody or near the time of sentencing.
This is in contrast to the authorities of
the SORNA registration jurisdictions—
the states, the District of Columbia, the
five principal U.S. territories, and
qualifying Indian tribes—who may
register their sex offenders prior to
release or near sentencing as provided
in 34 U.S.C. 20913(b), 20919(a). SORNA
instead enacted special provisions
under which Federal correctional and
supervision authorities (i) are required
to inform Federal (including military)
offenders with sex offense convictions
that they must register as required by
SORNA and (ii) must notify the (nonFederal) jurisdictions in which the sex
offenders will reside following release
or sentencing so that these jurisdictions
can integrate the sex offenders into their
registration programs. See 18 U.S.C.
4042(c); Public Law 105–119, sec.
115(a)(8)(C), as amended by Public Law
109–248, sec. 141(i) (10 U.S.C. 951
note); 73 FR at 38064; see also 18 U.S.C.
3563(a)(8); id. 3583(d) (third sentence);
id. 4209(a) (second sentence)
(mandatory Federal supervision
condition to comply with SORNA); 34
U.S.C 20931 (requiring the Secretary of
Defense to provide to the Attorney
General military sex offender
information for inclusion in the
National Sex Offender Registry and
National Sex Offender Public website).
The timing rule adopted for such
situations is that sex offenders released
from Federal or military custody or
convicted of Federal or military sex
offenses but not sentenced to
imprisonment must register within three
business days of entering or remaining
in a jurisdiction to reside, see 73 FR at
38064, which parallels SORNA’s normal
timeframe for registering or updating a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
registration following changes of
residence, see 34 U.S.C. 20913(c).
Section 72.7(a)(2)(i) refers to a sex
offender entering ‘‘or remaining’’ in a
jurisdiction to reside because, for
example, a Federal sex offender released
from a Federal prison located in a state
may remain in that state to reside, rather
than relocating to some other state. In
such a case, the three-business-day
period for registering with the state runs
from the time of the sex offender’s
release.
In terms of legal authority, the
requirement of § 72.7(a)(2)(i) is
supported by the Attorney General’s
authority to interpret and implement
SORNA’s requirement to register in the
jurisdiction of residence, 34 U.S.C.
20912(b), 20913(a); the Attorney
General’s authority under section
20913(d) to prescribe rules for the
registration of sex offenders who are
unable to comply with section
20913(b)’s timing rule for initial
registration; and the Attorney General’s
authority under section 20914(c) to
adopt time and manner specifications
for providing and updating registration
information, which includes the
authority to adopt time and manner
specifications for registration as
discussed above. Viewing a sex
offender’s being released from Federal
or military custody and taking up
residence in a jurisdiction as a change
of residence, this requirement is also
supportable as a direct application of
section 20913(c).
Paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of § 72.7 addresses
the situation of persons required to
register on the basis of foreign sex
offense convictions. Registration by the
convicting state is not an available
option under SORNA in such cases
because foreign states are not
registration jurisdictions under SORNA.
See 34 U.S.C. 20911(10). Also, there
may be no domestic jurisdiction in
which SORNA requires such offenders
to register—if they are not residing,
working, or attending school in the
United States at the time they are
released from custody or sentenced in
the foreign country—but SORNA’s
requirements will apply if they travel or
return to the United States. The rule
adopted for foreign conviction
situations is that the sex offender must
register within three business days of
entering a domestic jurisdiction to
reside, work, or attend school, see 73 FR
at 38050–51, 38064–65, which parallels
SORNA’s normal timeframe for
registering or updating a registration
following changes of residence,
employment, or student status, see 34
U.S.C. 20913(c).
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
In terms of legal authority, this
requirement is supported by the
Attorney General’s authority to interpret
and implement SORNA’s requirement to
register in jurisdictions of residence,
employment, and school attendance, 34
U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(a); the Attorney
General’s authority under section
20913(d) to prescribe rules for the
registration of sex offenders who are
unable to comply with section
20913(b)’s timing rule for initial
registration; and the Attorney General’s
authority under section 20914(c) to
adopt time and manner specifications
for providing and updating registration
information, which includes the
authority to adopt time and manner
specifications for registration as
discussed above. Insofar as a sex
offender’s travel or return to the United
States following a foreign conviction
involves a change of residence,
employment, or student status, this
requirement is also supportable as a
direct application of section 20913(c).
Paragraph (b)—Periodic In-Person
Verification
Paragraph (b) of § 72.7 sets out the
express requirement of 34 U.S.C. 20918
that sex offenders periodically appear in
person in the jurisdictions in which
they are required to register, allow the
jurisdictions to take current
photographs, and verify their
registration information, with the
frequency of the required appearances
determined by their tiering. See 73 FR
at 38067–68.
The second sentence of paragraph (b),
exercising the Attorney General’s
authority under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b),
interprets and implements section
20918’s requirement of verifying the
information in each registry to include
correcting any information that is out of
date or inaccurate and reporting any
new registration information. With
respect to most types of registration
information, other provisions of § 72.7
require reporting of changes within
shorter timeframes than the intervals
between periodic in-person appearances
for verification. Hence, a sex offender
who has complied with SORNA’s
requirements is likely to have reported
changes in most types of registration
information prior to his next verification
appearance. But § 72.7 does not
specially address the time and manner
for reporting changes in some types of
registration information. See
§ 72.6(a)(2)–(3), (e), (g) (requiring as well
information concerning actual and
purported dates of birth and Social
Security numbers, passports and
immigration documents, and
professional licenses). Sex offenders can
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
keep their registrations current with
respect to the latter categories of
information by reporting any changes in
their periodic verifications. See 73 FR at
38067–68.
Paragraph (c)—Reporting of Initiation
and Changes Concerning Name,
Residence, Employment, and School
Attendance
Paragraph (c) of § 72.7 is based on
SORNA’s express requirement that ‘‘[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
[34 U.S.C. 20913(a)] and inform that
jurisdiction of all changes in the
information required for that offender in
the sex offender registry.’’ 34 U.S.C.
20913(c); see 73 FR at 38065–66.
While SORNA provides a definite
timeframe for reporting these changes
(within three business days), specifies a
means of reporting (through in-person
appearance), and requires reporting of a
change in ‘‘at least 1 jurisdiction,’’ it
does not specify the particular
jurisdiction in which each kind of
change—i.e., change in name, residence,
employment, or school attendance—is
to be reported. As discussed earlier, the
Attorney General’s authority under 34
U.S.C. 20912(b) to interpret and
implement SORNA includes the
authority to further specify the manner
in which changes in registration
information are to be reported where
there are such gaps or ambiguities in
SORNA’s statutory provisions. In
addition, the Attorney General now has
express authority under 34 U.S.C.
20914(c) to prescribe the manner in
which all required registration
information is to be provided and
updated. Exercising those authorities in
paragraph (c) in § 72.7, the Attorney
General interprets and implements the
requirement of section 20913(c), and
prescribes the manner in which sex
offenders must provide and update
information about name, residence,
employment, or student status, by
specifying the particular jurisdiction in
which a sex offender must appear to
report the changes section 20913(c)
describes—in the residence jurisdiction
to report a change of name or residence,
in the employment jurisdiction to report
a change of employment, and in the
jurisdiction of school attendance to
report a change in school attendance.
See 73 FR at 38065.
For example, suppose that a sex
offender resides in state A and
commutes to work in State B. Pursuant
to 34 U.S.C. 20913(a), the sex offender
must register in both states—in State A
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
as his residence state, and in State B as
his employment state. Suppose that the
sex offender changes his place of
residence in State A and continues to
work at the same place in State B.
Logically, the sex offender should carry
out his in-person appearance in State A
to report his change of residence in
State A, rather than in State B, where
his contact with the latter state
(employment) has not changed.
Conversely, varying the example,
suppose that the sex offender changes
his place of employment from one
employer to another in State B, but
continues to reside in the same place in
State A. The sex offender should carry
out his in-person appearance in state B
to report his change of employment in
State B, rather than in State A, where
his contact with the latter state
(residence) has not changed.
These conclusions follow from the
underlying policies of SORNA’s inperson appearance requirements, which
aim to provide opportunities for face to
face encounters between sex offenders
and persons responsible for their
registrations in the local areas in which
they will be present. Such encounters
may help law enforcement personnel to
familiarize themselves with the sex
offenders in their areas, thereby
facilitating the effective discharge of
their protective and investigative
functions in relation to those sex
offenders, and helping to ensure that
their responsibilities to track those
offenders are taken seriously and carried
out consistently. 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. See 73 FR at 38065, 38067.
These policies are furthered by sex
offenders appearing in person to report
changes in residence, employment, and
school attendance in the jurisdictions in
which the changes occur, rather than in
other jurisdictions where they may be
required to register, but within whose
borders there has been no change in the
location of the sex offender. Section
72.7(c) in the rule accordingly provides
that changes in the most basic types of
location information—residence,
employment, school attendance—are to
be reported through in-person
appearances in the jurisdictions in
which they occur. Section 72.7(c) also
provides definiteness regarding the
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69877
reporting of name changes under 34
U.S.C. 20913(c), providing that such
changes are to be reported in the
residence jurisdiction, as the
jurisdiction in which a sex offender is
likely to have his most substantial
presence and contacts.
Paragraph (d)—Reporting of Departure
and Termination Concerning Residence,
Employment, and School Attendance
Paragraph (d) of § 72.7 requires sex
offenders to inform the jurisdictions in
which they reside if they will be
commencing residence, employment, or
school attendance in another
jurisdiction or outside of the United
States, and to inform the relevant
jurisdictions if they will be terminating
residence, employment, or school
attendance in a jurisdiction. The
Attorney General has previously
articulated these requirements in the
SORNA Guidelines. See 73 FR at
38065–67. These requirements are not
part of the requirement under 34 U.S.C.
20913(c) to report certain changes
through in-person appearances and they
may be reported by any means allowed
by registration jurisdictions in their
discretion. See 73 FR at 38067.
Paragraph (d)(1) of § 72.7, relating to
notice about intended commencement
of residence, employment, or school
attendance outside of a jurisdiction, and
paragraph (d)(2), relating to notice about
termination of residence, employment,
or school attendance in a jurisdiction,
are complementary, each applying in
certain situations that may be outside
the scope of the other. For example,
§ 72.7(d)(1) requires a sex offender to
inform his residence jurisdiction if he
will be starting a job in another
jurisdiction, even if he will continue to
reside where he has resided and will not
be terminating any existing connection
to the residence jurisdiction. Section
72.7(d)(2) requires a sex offender to
inform a jurisdiction of his intended
termination of residence, employment,
or school attendance in that jurisdiction
‘‘even if there is no ascertainable or
expected future place of residence,
employment, or school attendance for
the sex offender.’’ 73 FR at 38066.
Regarding the underlying legal
authority for § 72.7(d), its informational
requirements overlap with types of
information 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)
expressly requires sex offenders to
provide, which include information as
to where a sex offender ‘‘will reside,’’
‘‘will be an employee,’’ or ‘‘will be a
student.’’ Id. 20914(a)(3)–(5). To the
extent § 72.7(d) goes beyond the
registration information that SORNA
expressly requires, it is a
straightforward exercise of the Attorney
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
69878
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
General’s authority under 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(8) to require any additional
registration information.
Even before the enactment of
International Megan’s Law, the Attorney
General’s implementation authority
under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b) was
understood to include the authority to
specify time and manner requirements
for providing and updating registration
information, as discussed above.
Currently, section 20914(c) confers
express authority on the Attorney
General to adopt the time and manner
requirements set forth in § 72.7(d)—i.e.,
that (i) intended commencement of
residence, employment, or school
attendance in another jurisdiction or
outside the United States is to be
reported to the residence jurisdiction
(by whatever means it allows) prior to
any termination of residence in that
jurisdiction and prior to commencing
residence, employment, or school
attendance in the other jurisdiction or
outside of the United States; and (ii)
intended termination of residence,
employment, or school attendance in a
jurisdiction is to be reported to the
jurisdiction (by whatever means it
allows) prior to the termination of
residence, employment, or school
attendance in the jurisdiction. Section
72.7(d)’s requirement that the intended
actions or changes are to be reported
prior to the termination of residence,
employment, or school attendance in
the relevant jurisdiction ensures that the
reporting requirement applies while the
sex offender is still subject to the
requirement to register and keep the
registration current in the jurisdiction
pursuant to 34 U.S.C. 20913(a). This
approach avoids any question about the
validity of requiring a sex offender to
provide or update information in a
jurisdiction in which he is no longer
required to register under SORNA.
The exercise of the authorities
described above in § 72.7(d) furthers
SORNA’s objective of creating a
‘‘comprehensive national system for the
registration of [sex] offenders,’’ 34
U.S.C. 20901, which reliably tracks sex
offenders as they move away from and
into registration jurisdictions. A sex
offender’s departure from a jurisdiction
in which he is registered may eventually
be discovered—e.g., because he fails to
appear for the next periodic verification
of his registration, see id. 20918—even
if he does not affirmatively notify the
jurisdiction that he is leaving. But
considerable time may elapse before
that happens, leaving a cold trail for law
enforcement efforts to locate the sex
offender, if he does not register in the
destination jurisdiction as SORNA
requires.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
For example, for a sex offender who
decides to change his residence from
one state to another, § 72.7(d) requires
the sex offender to inform the state he
is leaving prior to his departure, and
§ 72.7(c) requires him to inform the
destination state within three business
days of his arrival there. Under
SORNA’s procedures for information
sharing among registration jurisdictions,
the state of origin in such a case directly
notifies the identified destination state.
See 34 U.S.C. 20921(b), 20923(b)(3); 73
FR at 38065; 76 FR at 1638. If the sex
offender then fails to appear and register
as expected in the destination state,
appropriate follow-up ensues, which
may include investigative efforts by
state and local law enforcement and the
U.S. Marshals Service to locate the sex
offender, issuance of a warrant for his
arrest, and entry of information into
national law enforcement databases
reflecting the sex offender’s status as an
absconder or unlocatable. See 34 U.S.C.
20924; 73 FR at 38069. In the context of
this system, the requirement of § 72.7(d)
for a sex offender to notify the residence
jurisdiction concerning his departure is
an important element. It helps to ensure
that agencies and officials responsible
for sex offender registration and its
enforcement are promptly made aware
of major changes in the location of sex
offenders, and thereby reduces the risk
that sex offenders will disappear in the
interstices between jurisdictions.
In so doing, § 72.7(d) resolves certain
potential problems in the operation of
SORNA’s registration system following
the Supreme Court’s decision in Nichols
v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1113 (2016),
and a similar earlier decision by the
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, United
States v. Lunsford, 725 F.3d 859 (8th
Cir. 2013). Nichols involved a sex
offender who abandoned his residence
in Kansas and relocated to the
Philippines, without informing the
Kansas registration authorities of his
departure. The issue in the case was
whether Nichols had violated 34 U.S.C.
20913(c), which requires a sex offender
‘‘not later than three business days after
each change of name, residence,
employment, or student status’’ to
‘‘appear in person in at least 1
jurisdiction involved pursuant to
subsection (a) and inform that
jurisdiction of all changes’’ in the
required registration information.
The Court noted that subsection (a) of
section 20913 mentions three
jurisdictions as possibly ‘‘involved’’—
‘‘where the offender resides, where the
offender is an employee, and where the
offender is a student’’— which would
not include the state of Kansas after
Nichols had moved to the Philippines.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Nichols, 136 S. Ct. at 1117 (quoting 34
U.S.C. 20913(a)). The Court further
noted that section 20913(c) requires
appearance and registration within three
business days after a change of
residence, and Nichols could not have
appeared in Kansas after he left the
state. Id. at 1117–18. The Court
accordingly concluded that Nichols’
failure to inform Kansas of his departure
was not a violation of section 20913(c),
since Kansas was no longer an
‘‘involved’’ jurisdiction in which
section 20913(c) may require a sex
offender to report changes in residence.
Id. at 1118.
Applying the same reasoning to the
domestic context, if a sex offender
terminates his residence in a state and
thereafter takes up residence in another
state, he cannot violate section 20913(c)
by failing to inform the state he is
leaving. For, following the termination
of residence in that state, it is no longer
a ‘‘jurisdiction involved’’ for purposes
of section 20913(c).
There is no comparable problem,
however, with § 72.7(d)’s requirement
that a sex offender inform a jurisdiction
in which he resides of his intended
departure from the jurisdiction, because
§ 72.7(d) does not depend on the
requirements of section 20913(c).
Rather, § 72.7(d) is grounded in the
requirement of section 20914(a) that sex
offenders provide certain information,
including ‘‘[a]ny other information
required by the Attorney General,’’ and
the requirement of section 20914(c) that
they report the required information in
the ‘‘time and manner . . . prescribed
by the Attorney General.’’
The Attorney General’s exercise of his
authorities under section 20914(a) and
20914(c) to require sex offenders to
inform their registration jurisdictions
that they will be going elsewhere in no
way conflicts with Nichols’ conclusion
that section 20913(c) does not require
such pre-departure notice of intended
relocation. Section 20914(a)(8) says that
sex offenders must provide ‘‘[a]ny other
information required by the Attorney
General.’’ The statute does not say that
sex offenders must provide ‘‘[a]ny other
information required by the Attorney
General, except for information about
intended departure from the
jurisdiction.’’ Nichols’ interpretation of
section 20913(c) provides no basis for
reading such an unstated limitation into
section 20914(a)(8). Likewise, Nichols
provides no basis for reading unstated
limitations into the Attorney General’s
authority—now expressly granted by
section 20914(c)—to prescribe time and
manner requirements for providing and
updating registration information,
which adequately supports § 72.7(d)’s
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
requirement that a sex offender inform
the jurisdiction in which he resides
about intended departure prior to any
termination of residence and before
going elsewhere.
The Attorney General’s adoption of
the § 72.7(d) requirements is also
consistent with the Supreme Court’s
analysis of particular arguments and
issues in Nichols. The salient points are
as follows:
First, the Court in Nichols noted that
the predecessor Federal sex offender
registration law (the ‘‘Wetterling Act’’)
required a sex offender to ‘‘report the
change of address to the responsible
agency in the State the person is
leaving,’’ while SORNA contains no
comparable provision that expressly
requires sex offenders to notify
jurisdictions they are leaving. 136 S. Ct.
at 1118 (quoting 42 U.S.C. 14071(b)(5)
(2000)). However, SORNA does not
attempt to articulate all the particulars
of its registration requirements for sex
offenders, instead authorizing the
Attorney General to complete the
regulatory scheme through
interpretation and implementation of
SORNA. See, e.g., 34 U.S.C. 20912(b),
20913(d), 20914(a)(8), 20914(c). Given
the extent of the Attorney General’s
powers under SORNA, it was not
necessary for Congress to include an
express provision in SORNA requiring
sex offenders to notify jurisdictions they
are leaving. Nor can there be any doubt
that requiring such notification is now
within the terms of the Attorney
General’s powers under SORNA, as
discussed above. Indeed, 34 U.S.C.
20923(b)(3)—which provides that a
jurisdiction’s officials are to inform each
jurisdiction ‘‘from or to which a change
of residence, employment, or student
status occurs’’—contemplates the
Attorney General’s adoption of
requirements like those appearing in
§ 72.7(d). For if sex offenders were not
required to advise the jurisdictions they
leave of their departure and destination,
those jurisdictions could not inform the
jurisdictions ‘‘to which’’ sex offenders
relocate.
Second, the Court in Nichols rejected
an argument that a jurisdiction
necessarily remains ‘‘involved’’ for
purposes of section 20913(c) if the sex
offender continues to appear on the
jurisdiction’s registry as a current
resident. The Court responded that
section 20913(a) gives jurisdictions
where the offender resides, is an
employee, or is a student as the only
possibilities for an ‘‘involved’’
jurisdiction, and does not include a
jurisdiction ‘‘where the offender appears
on a registry.’’ 136 S. Ct. at 1118. The
Court said ‘‘[w]e decline the . . .
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
invitation to add an extra clause to the
text of § [20]913(a).’’ Id. In contrast,
§ 72.7(d) in this rule does not require
the addition of an extra clause to section
20913(a). It involves the exercise of the
Attorney General’s authorities under
SORNA to include the information
described in § 72.7(d) in the information
that a sex offender must provide to the
jurisdictions described in the actual
clauses of section 20913(a)—i.e., those
in which he resides, is an employee, or
is a student.
Third, the Court rejected an argument
that Nichols was required to inform
Kansas of his intended departure based
on 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(3)’s direction to
sex offenders to provide information
about where they ‘‘will reside.’’ The
Court noted that ‘‘§ [20]914(a) merely
lists the pieces of information that a sex
offender must provide if and when he
updates his registration; it says nothing
about whether the offender has an
obligation to update his registration in
the first place.’’ 136 S. Ct. at 1118. In
context, the Court’s point was that
section 20914(a)(3) just specifies a type
of information sex offenders must
provide, and does not say when they
must provide it, so section 20914(a)(3)
does not in itself require sex offenders
to provide change of residence
information in advance when they leave
a jurisdiction. For example, without
more, section 20914(a)(3) might be taken
to entail that sex offenders must advise
where they ‘‘will reside’’ when initially
registering before release from
imprisonment, see 34 U.S.C.
20913(b)(1), but not necessarily that
they give advance notice to their
registration jurisdictions of expected
future residence on subsequent
relocations.
However, this understanding of
section 20914(a)(3) does not imply any
limitation on the Attorney General’s
authority to require a sex offender to
‘‘update his registration in the first
place,’’ Nichols, 136 S. Ct. at 1118, on
the basis of 34 U.S.C. 20914(c), which
directs that ‘‘[a] sex offender shall
provide and update information
required under subsection (a) . . . in
conformity with any time and manner
requirements prescribed by the Attorney
General.’’ Nor does it imply any
limitation on the Attorney General’s
authority under SORNA to require sex
offenders to report the full range of
information described in § 72.7(d). In
§ 72.7(d), as discussed above, the
Attorney General exercises these
authorities to require sex offenders to
inform jurisdictions of intended
departure and expected future residence
prior to any termination of residence in
a jurisdiction.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69879
Finally, the Court in Nichols rejected
an argument that Nichols had to notify
Kansas of his departure on the theory
that he engaged in two changes of
residence—the first when he abandoned
his residence in Kansas, and the second
when he checked into a hotel in the
Philippines. 136 S. Ct. at 1118–19.
Section 72.7(d) in this rule, however,
does not assume any such multiplicity
in changes of residence. Rather, it
establishes a freestanding requirement
to inform registration jurisdictions in
advance of termination of residence and
commencement of intended future
residence.
At the end of the Nichols decision, the
Court noted that—considering the
International Megan’s Law amendments
to SORNA—‘‘[o]ur interpretation of the
SORNA provisions at issue in this case
in no way means that sex offenders will
be able to escape punishment for
leaving the United States without
notifying the jurisdictions in which they
lived while in this country.’’ 136 S. Ct.
at 1119. The Court noted the addition of
a new subsection (b) to 18 U.S.C. 2250,
which ‘‘criminalized the ‘knowin[g]
fail[ure] to provide information required
by [SORNA] relating to intended travel
in foreign commerce,’ ’’ and the addition
of 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7), which requires
sex offenders to provide information
about intended international travel. 136
S. Ct. at 1119 (brackets in original)
(quoting 18 U.S.C. 2250(b)(2)). The
Court concluded: ‘‘We are thus
reassured that our holding today is not
likely to create ‘loopholes and
deficiencies’ in SORNA’s nationwide
sex-offender registration scheme.’’ Id.
(quoting United States v. Kebodeaux,
570 U.S. 387, 399 (2013)).
Section 72.7(d) in this rule similarly
helps to ensure that the interpretation of
34 U.S.C. 20913(c) in Nichols and
Lunsford does not create ‘‘loopholes and
deficiencies’’ in the operation of
SORNA’s tracking system, in relation to
both domestic and international
relocations. For example, consider a sex
offender who terminates his residence
in a state without informing the state.
Suppose the sex offender is later found
elsewhere in the United States, but he
cannot be shown to have taken up
residence—or to have been employed or
a student—in another jurisdiction after
leaving the original state of residence. In
light of Nichols, section 20913(c) does
not require the sex offender to report his
relocation to the original state because
it is no longer an ‘‘involved’’
jurisdiction after he leaves, and there
may be no other relevant jurisdiction in
which he must report the change, i.e.,
one in which he presently resides, is
employed, or is a student. However,
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
69880
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
with § 72.7(d) in effect, a sex offender in
this circumstance will have violated 34
U.S.C. 20914(a) and (c)’s requirements
to provide registration information,
including ‘‘[a]ny other information’’
prescribed by the Attorney General, in
the time and manner prescribed by the
Attorney General. At a minimum, in the
case described, the sex offender would
have failed to provide the information
that he is terminating his residence in
the original state of residence prior to
his termination of residence in that
state, contravening § 72.7(d).
Hence, § 72.7(d) provides an
additional safeguard against registered
sex offenders simply disappearing
without informing anyone about their
relocation. The consequences for
noncompliant sex offenders include
potential prosecution by registration
jurisdictions, which have been
encouraged to adopt departure
notification requirements similar to
§ 72.7(d) in their registration laws by the
Attorney General’s prior articulation of
those requirements in the SORNA
Guidelines. See 73 FR at 38065–66. The
consequences of noncompliance with
§ 72.7(d) will also include potential
Federal prosecution under 18 U.S.C.
2250 for violations committed under
circumstances supporting Federal
jurisdiction.
Sex offenders must comply both with
the requirements of § 72.7(c) and with
the requirements of § 72.7(d). For
example, suppose a sex offender
changes residence from State A to State
B. It is not sufficient if (i) the sex
offender complies with § 72.7(d) by
telling State A that he is leaving and
going to State B, but (ii) he fails to
appear in State B and register there as
required by § 72.7(c), and then (iii) he
attempts to excuse his failure to comply
with § 72.7(c) on the ground that State
A could have told State B about his
relocation. Likewise, it is not sufficient
if the sex offender in such a case (i)
complies with § 72.7(c) by registering in
State B, but (ii) he fails to inform State
A about the intended relocation prior to
his departure, and then (iii) he attempts
to excuse his failure to comply with
§ 72.7(d) on the ground that State B
could have told State A about his
relocation. As discussed above,
appearance and registration by sex
offenders in jurisdictions in which they
commence residence, employment, or
school attendance, as required by
§ 72.7(c), and notification by sex
offenders to jurisdictions in which they
terminate residence, employment, or
school attendance, as required by
§ 72.7(d), both serve important purposes
in SORNA’s registration system as
articulated in this rule and the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
previously issued SORNA guidelines.
Compliance with both requirements is
necessary to the seamless and effective
operation of that system for the reasons
explained above.
Paragraph (e)—Reporting of Changes in
Information Relating to Remote
Communication Identifiers, Temporary
Lodging, and Vehicles
Paragraph (e) requires sex offenders to
report to their residence jurisdictions
within three business days changes in
remote communication identifier
information, temporary lodging
information, and vehicle information. In
terms of legal authority, as discussed
earlier, these requirements are
supportable on the basis of the Attorney
General’s authority to interpret and
implement SORNA’s requirement to
keep the registration current, the
Attorney General’s authority to expand
the information that sex offenders must
provide to registration jurisdictions, and
the Attorney General’s authority to
prescribe the time and manner for
providing and updating registration
information. See 34 U.S.C. 20912(b),
20913(a), 20914(a)(8), (c), 20916(b); 73
FR at 38066; 76 FR at 1637. (The
SORNA Guidelines state that such
changes are to be reported
‘‘immediately’’ and explain at an earlier
point that ‘‘immediately’’ in the context
of SORNA’s timing requirements means
within three business days, see 73 FR at
38060, 38066.) SORNA does not require
that these changes be reported through
in-person appearances and they may be
reported by any means allowed by
registration jurisdictions in their
discretion. See id. at 38067.
Paragraph (f)—Reporting of
International Travel
Paragraph (f) of § 72.7 requires sex
offenders to report intended travel
outside of the United States to their
residence jurisdictions. The expected
travel must be reported at least 21 days
in advance and, if applicable, prior to
any termination of residence in the
jurisdiction. Reporting of information
about intended international travel is an
express SORNA requirement following
SORNA’s amendment by International
Megan’s Law. See 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7);
Public Law 114–119, sec. 6(a). The
underlying reasons for requiring
reporting of international travel are
explained above in connection with
§ 72.6(d) of this rule.
The 21-day advance notice
requirement is designed to provide
relevant agencies, including the U.S.
Marshals Service and INTERPOL
Washington-U.S. National Central
Bureau, sufficient lead time for any
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
investigation or inquiry that may be
warranted relating to the sex offender’s
international travel, and for notification
of U.S. and foreign authorities in
destination countries, prior to the sex
offender’s arrival in a destination
country. The requirement that the
intended international travel be
reported prior to any termination of
residence in the jurisdiction—
potentially an issue in cases in which
the sex offender is terminating his U.S.
residence and relocating to a foreign
country—ensures that a SORNA
violation has occurred in case of
noncompliance while the sex offender is
still residing in the jurisdiction and
hence required by 34 U.S.C. 20913(a) to
register and keep the registration current
in that jurisdiction. The requirement to
report intended international travel at
least 21 days in advance applies in
relation to all international travel,
including both cases in which the sex
offender is temporarily traveling abroad
while maintaining a domestic residence
and cases in which the sex offender is
terminating his residence in the
particular jurisdiction or the United
States.
The rule recognizes, however, that
reporting of intended international
travel 21 days in advance is not possible
in some circumstances. Section
72.8(a)(2) of the rule generally addresses
situations in which sex offenders cannot
comply with SORNA requirements
because of circumstances beyond their
control, and it specifically addresses
inability to comply with the timeframe
for reporting of international travel in
Example 3 in that provision.
In terms of legal authority, the
requirement to report intended
international travel to the residence
jurisdiction at least 21 days in advance
and prior to any termination of
residence is supportable as an exercise
of the express authority of the Attorney
General under 34 U.S.C. 20914(c),
which states in part that ‘‘[a] sex
offender shall provide and update . . .
information relating to intended travel
outside the United States . . . in
conformity with any time and manner
requirements prescribed by the Attorney
General.’’ As discussed above, the
international travel reporting
requirement, including its associated
timeframe requirement, is also
supportable on the basis of other
SORNA authorities of the Attorney
General, which were relied on in
SORNA guidelines preceding the
addition of 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7), (c) by
International Megan’s Law. These
authorities include the Attorney
General’s authority under 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(8) to expand the range of
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
required registration information and
the Attorney General’s authority under
34 U.S.C. 20912(b) to issue rules to
interpret and implement SORNA’s
requirement to keep the registration
current.
Paragraph (g)—Compliance With
Jurisdictions’ Requirements for
Registering and Keeping the Registration
Current
Paragraph (g) of § 72.7 requires sex
offenders to register and keep the
registration current in conformity with
the time and manner requirements of
their registration jurisdictions, where
they have not done so in the time and
manner normally required under
SORNA.
SORNA generally requires sex
offenders to register initially before
release from imprisonment or within
three business days of sentencing, but it
recognizes that sex offenders may be
unable to comply with these
requirements in some circumstances.
The difficulty can arise in cases in
which a jurisdiction has no provision
for registering certain sex offenders as
required by SORNA at the time of their
release—or even no registration program
at all at that time—but the jurisdiction
can register them later as it progresses
in its implementation of SORNA’s
requirements. The SORNA Guidelines
provide guidance to registration
jurisdictions about integrating
previously excluded sex offenders into
their registration programs in such
circumstances and ensuring that these
sex offenders fully comply with
SORNA’s requirements. See 73 FR at
38063–64; see also Smith, 538 U.S. 84
(application of new sex offender
registration requirements to previously
convicted sex offenders does not violate
the constitutional prohibition on ex post
facto laws).
Because the normal timeframe for
initial registration under SORNA may
be past in these situations, SORNA
authorizes the Attorney General to
prescribe rules for registration.
Specifically, 34 U.S.C. 20913(d) gives
the Attorney General the authority to
specify the applicability of SORNA’s
requirements to sex offenders with preSORNA or pre-SORNA-implementation
convictions, ‘‘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’’ SORNA’s initial registration
requirements. More broadly, as
discussed above, the Attorney General’s
general authority under 34 U.S.C.
20912(b) to interpret and implement
SORNA includes the authority to fill
gaps in SORNA’s time and manner
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
requirements for registering and keeping
the registration current, and 34 U.S.C.
20914(c) expressly requires sex
offenders to provide and update
registration information required by
SORNA in the time and manner
prescribed by the Attorney General.
In section 72.7(g) in this rule, the
Attorney General exercises his
authorities under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b),
20913(d), and 20914(c) to require sex
offenders to register and keep their
registrations current in the time and
manner specified by their registration
jurisdictions, where the sex offenders
have not registered or kept the
registrations up to date in the time and
manner normally required by SORNA as
articulated in the earlier portions of
§ 72.7. This requirement complements
the directions to registration
jurisdictions in the SORNA Guidelines
about integrating previously excluded
sex offenders and previously omitted
SORNA requirements into their
registration programs, with suitable
timeframes and procedures, as the
jurisdictions progress with SORNA
implementation. See 73 FR at 38063–64.
Of course sex offenders are
independently required by the laws of
their registration jurisdictions to comply
with the jurisdictions’ time and manner
specifications for registering and
updating their registrations. The effect
of § 72.7(g) is to adopt the jurisdictions’
time and manner specifications as
SORNA requirements in the situations it
covers.
Section 72.7(g)(1) includes four
examples. The first example concerns a
situation in which a state does not
register sex offenders before release, but
a sex offender can register soon after
release in conformity with the state’s
procedures. The second example
concerns a situation in which a
jurisdiction does not register certain sex
offenders at all at the time of their
release or entry into the jurisdiction, but
a sex offender in the excluded class
becomes able to register at a later time
and is directed by the jurisdiction to do
so after it extends its registration
requirements.
As the Supreme Court noted in
Reynolds, SORNA, in section 20913(b),
‘‘says that a sex offender must register
before completing his prison term, but
the provision says nothing about when
a pre-Act offender who completed his
prison term pre-Act must register. . . .
Pre-Act offenders . . . might, on their
own, reach different conclusions about
whether, or how, the new registration
requirements applied to them. A ruling
from the Attorney General [under
section 20913(d)], however, could
diminish or eliminate those
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69881
uncertainties. . . .’’ 565 U.S. at 441–42.
In § 72.7(g), the Attorney General
exercises his authorities under sections
20912(b), 20913(d), and 20914(c) to
‘‘eliminate those uncertainties’’ in
conformity with Congress’s intent
concerning the filling of ‘‘potential
lacunae’’ in SORNA, 565 U.S. at 441–42.
Section 72.7(g) fills the gaps in such
cases by adopting the timing rules and
procedures of the relevant registration
jurisdictions. This applies in relation to
sex offenders who do not register
initially in conformity with SORNA
because they were convicted and
released before SORNA’s enactment, as
described by the Court in Reynolds, and
in relation to all other sex offenders who
do not register in accordance with the
normal time and manner requirements
under SORNA, e.g., because of shortfalls
in a jurisdictions’ registration
requirements that may later be corrected
or that allow registration in some
variant way.
The third example in § 72.7(g)(1)
concerns a sex offender in a jurisdiction
that initially has no procedure for sex
offenders to periodically update
registrations through verification
appearances as required by SORNA, but
the jurisdiction later directs the sex
offender to do so after it incorporates
this aspect of SORNA into its
registration program. Since the periodic
verification appearances required by 34
U.S.C. 20918 fall under SORNA’s
requirement to keep the registration
current and involve updating the
registration information required by
SORNA, it is within the Attorney
General’s authority under 34 U.S.C.
20912(b) and 20914(c) to specify the
time and manner for the verifications
where SORNA’s verification
requirement or normal timeframes for
verifications have not been followed.
Section 72.7(g)(1) directs sex offenders
to comply with the jurisdiction’s
requirements for periodic verification in
such situations.
The fourth example in § 72.7(g)(1)
concerns a sex offender who does not
provide particular information within
the time required by SORNA because a
jurisdiction’s informational
requirements fall short of SORNA’s
requirements but are later brought into
line. The example illustrates the point
by reference to email addresses. As
provided in § 72.6(b), sex offenders
must include this information when
they register and, as provided in
§ 72.7(e), they must report any
subsequent changes within three
business days. Where the normal
reporting time is past when a
jurisdiction decides to include a type of
information in its sex offender registry,
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
69882
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
§ 72.7(g)(1) requires sex offenders to
comply with the jurisdiction’s
directions to provide the information at
a later time.
Section 72.7(g)(2) provides that, in a
prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 2250,
§ 72.7(g)(1) does not relieve a sex
offender of the need to show an inability
to comply with SORNA as an
affirmative defense to liability. The
situations described in § 72.7(g)(1),
which may involve noncompliance with
SORNA’s requirements because of
deficits in registration jurisdictions’
requirements or procedures, overlap
with situations in which a sex offender
may have a defense under 18 U.S.C.
2250(c) because he was prevented from
complying with SORNA by
circumstances beyond his control.
However, the purpose and effect of
§ 72.7(g)(1) are to hold sex offenders to
compliance with the registration rules
and procedures of registration
jurisdictions in the situations it covers.
Section 72.7(g) does not, in any case,
relieve sex offenders of the obligation to
comply fully with SORNA if able to do
so or shift the burden of proof to the
government to establish that a
registration jurisdiction’s procedures
would have allowed a sex offender to
register or keep the registration current
in conformity with SORNA. Rather, the
defense under 18 U.S.C. 2250(c) is an
affirmative defense, as that provision
explicitly provides, and as §§ 72.7(g)(2)
and 72.8(a)(2) in this rule reiterate.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Section 72.8—Liability for Violations
Section 72.8 of the rule explains the
liability of sex offenders for SORNA
violations and limitations on that
potential liability.
Paragraph (a)(1)—Offense
SORNA’s criminal provision, 18
U.S.C. 2250, provides criminal liability
for sex offenders based on SORNA
violations.
Section 72.8(a)(1)(i) in the rule refers
to potential criminal liability under 18
U.S.C. 2250(a). Section 2250(a)
authorizes imprisonment for up to 10
years based on a knowing failure to
register or update a registration as
required by SORNA. Federal criminal
liability may result under this provision
when the violation occurs under
circumstances supporting Federal
jurisdiction as specified in the statute.
These jurisdictional circumstances
include (i) violation of SORNA by sex
offenders convicted of sex offenses
under Federal (including military) law,
the law of the District of Columbia,
Indian tribal law, or the law of a U.S.
territory or possession; and (ii) travel in
interstate or foreign commerce or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
entering, leaving, or residing in Indian
country. Section 2250(a) reaches all
types of SORNA violations, including
failure to register or keep the
registration current in each jurisdiction
of residence, employment, or school
attendance, as required by 34 U.S.C.
20913; failure to provide or update
registration information required by 34
U.S.C. 20914; or failure to appear
periodically and verify the registration
information, as required by 34 U.S.C.
20918.
Section 72.8(a)(1)(ii) in the rule refers
to potential criminal liability under 18
U.S.C. 2250(b), which was added by
International Megan’s Law. See Public
Law 114–119, sec. 6(b). Section 2250(b)
defines an offense that specifically
reaches violations of SORNA’s
international travel reporting
requirement. The provision authorizes
imprisonment for up to 10 years for a
sex offender who (i) knowingly fails to
provide information required by
SORNA relating to intended travel in
foreign commerce and (ii) ‘‘engages or
attempts to engage in the intended
travel in foreign commerce.’’ The
jurisdictional language in section
2250(b) reaches cases in which the
contemplated travel is not carried out,
in addition to those in which the sex
offender does travel abroad. For
example, consider a sex offender who (i)
purchases a plane ticket to a foreign
destination but (ii) fails to report the
intended international travel as required
by SORNA and (iii) does not actually
leave the country because the
unreported travel is detected by the
authorities who arrest him at the airport.
The attempted travel in foreign
commerce provides a sufficient
jurisdictional basis for Federal
prosecution under section 2250(b).
Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in the rule
explains the condition for liability
under 18 U.S.C. 2250(a)–(b) that the
defendant ‘‘knowingly’’ fail to comply
with a SORNA requirement. The
‘‘knowingly’’ limitation ensures that sex
offenders are not held liable under
section 2250 for violations of
registration requirements they did not
know about. However, this does not
require knowledge that the requirement
is imposed by SORNA. State sex
offenders, for example, are likely to be
instructed in the registration process
regarding many of the registration
requirements appearing in SORNA,
which are widely paralleled in state
registration laws, such as the need to
report changes in residence,
employment, internet identifiers, and
vehicle information; the need to report
intended international travel; and the
need to appear periodically to update
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
and verify registration information. The
acknowledgment forms obtained from
sex offenders in registration often
provide a means of establishing their
knowledge of the registration
requirements in later prosecutions for
violations. See 76 FR at 1634–35, 1638.
But sex offenders may not be informed
that the registration requirements they
are subject to are imposed by a
particular Federal law, SORNA. This
does not impugn the fairness or
propriety of holding sex offenders liable
under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for knowingly
violating a registration requirement that
is in fact imposed by SORNA, so long
as they are aware of an obligation from
some source to comply with the
requirement. See, e.g., United States v.
Elkins, 683 F.3d 1039, 1050 (9th Cir.
2012); United States v. Whaley, 577
F.3d 254, 261–62 (5th Cir. 2009).
Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) makes these
points about 18 U.S.C. 2250’s
knowledge requirement in the rule.
Paragraph (a)(2)—Defense
Subsection (c) of 18 U.S.C. 2250
provides an affirmative defense to
liability under certain conditions where
uncontrollable circumstances prevented
a sex offender from complying with
SORNA, so long as the sex offender
complied as soon as the preventing
circumstances ceased. Section 72.8(a)(2)
in the rule reproduces this affirmative
defense provision and provides
examples of its operation.
Registration is a reciprocal process,
involving the provision of registration
information by sex offenders, and the
registration jurisdiction’s acceptance of
the information for inclusion in the sex
offender registry. The circumstances
preventing compliance with SORNA
under section 2250(c) accordingly may
be a registration jurisdiction’s failure or
refusal to carry out the reciprocal role
needed to effect registration, or the
updating of a registration, as required by
SORNA.
Example 1 in § 72.8(a)(2) illustrates
this type of situation, describing a case
in which a sex offender cannot appear
and report an inter-jurisdictional change
of residence within three business days
because the office with which he needs
to register will not meet with him for a
week. The case implicates both 34
U.S.C. 20913(a)’s requirement that a sex
offender register in each jurisdiction in
which he resides and 34 U.S.C.
20913(c)’s requirement that sex
offenders report changes of residence
within three business days. These
provisions’ net effect is that a sex
offender establishing residence in a new
jurisdiction must register there but with
a three-business-day grace period. In the
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
case described, 18 U.S.C. 2250(c) would
excuse the failure to report within the
three-business-day timeframe. However,
the inability to meet section 20913(c)’s
specific timeframe does not obviate the
need to comply with section 20913(a)’s
requirement to register in each state of
residence. Nothing prevents the sex
offender from complying with this
registration requirement once the office
is willing to meet with him, so he will
need to appear and carry out the
registration at the appointed time in
order to have the benefit of the 18 U.S.C.
2250(c) defense.
Example 2 in § 72.8(a)(2) also
illustrates a situation in which the
circumstance preventing compliance
with SORNA is a failure by the
registration jurisdiction to carry out a
necessary reciprocal role. The specific
situation described in the example is a
state’s refusal to register sex offenders
based on the offense for which the sex
offender was convicted. For example,
SORNA requires registration based on
conviction for child pornography
possession offenses, see 34 U.S.C.
20911(7)(G), but some states that have
not fully implemented SORNA’s
requirements in their registration
programs may be unwilling to register a
sex offender on the basis of such an
offense. Section 2250(c)’s excuse of the
failure to register terminates if the state
subsequently becomes willing to register
the sex offender, because the
circumstance preventing compliance
with SORNA no longer exists. However,
liability based on a continuing failure by
the sex offender to comply with SORNA
in such a case—following a change in
state policy or practice allowing
compliance—depends on the sex
offender’s becoming aware of the change
since, as discussed above, 18 U.S.C.
2250 does not impose liability for
violation of unknown registration
obligations. Cf. 73 FR at 38063–64
(direction to registration jurisdictions to
instruct sex offenders about new or
additional registration duties in
connection with SORNA
implementation).
Example 3 in § 72.8(a)(2) describes a
situation in which the circumstance
preventing compliance with SORNA
relates to the situation of the sex
offender rather than the registration
jurisdiction. The second sentence of
§ 72.7(f) in the rule requires in part that
a sex offender report intended
international travel 21 days in advance,
which he cannot do if he does not
anticipate a trip abroad that far in
advance. In such a case, as described in
the example, 18 U.S.C. 2250(c) would
excuse a sex offender’s failure to report
the travel 21 days in advance. Cf. 76 FR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
at 1638 (‘‘[R]equiring 21 days advance
notice may occasionally be unnecessary
or inappropriate. For example, a sex
offender may need to travel abroad
unexpectedly because of a family or
work emergency.’’). However, inability
to comply with the 21-day timeframe in
a particular case does not prevent a sex
offender from otherwise complying with
SORNA’s requirements to inform the
residence jurisdiction about intended
international travel, appearing in 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(7) and in §§ 72.6(d) and
72.7(f) in this rule. Hence, once the
intention to travel exists, the sex
offender must inform the registration
jurisdiction to avoid liability under 18
U.S.C. 2250.
Paragraph (b)—Supervision Condition
Section 72.8(b) recounts that, for sex
offenders convicted of Federal offenses,
compliance with SORNA is a mandatory
condition of probation and supervised
release. See 18 U.S.C. 3563(a)(8),
3583(d) (third sentence). Violation of
this condition may result in revocation
of release. See 18 U.S.C. 3565(a)(2),
3583(e)(3). Section 72.8(b) also notes
that compliance with SORNA is a
mandatory condition of parole for sex
offenders convicted of Federal offenses,
see 18 U.S.C. 4209(a) (second sentence),
a requirement of narrow application
given the abolition of parole in Federal
cases, except for offenses committed
before November 1, 1987.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Attorney General, in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this
regulation and by approving it certifies
that this regulation will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the purposes of that Act because the
regulation only articulates SORNA’s
registration requirements for sex
offenders.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563—
Regulatory Planning and Review
This regulation has been drafted and
reviewed in accordance with Executive
Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and
Review,’’ section 1(b), Principles of
Regulation, and Executive Order 13563,
‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review.’’ The regulation expands part
72 of title 28 of the Code of Federal
Regulations to provide a concise and
comprehensive statement of what sex
offenders must do to comply with
SORNA’s requirements, following
express requirements appearing in
SORNA and previous exercises of
authority SORNA grants to the Attorney
General to interpret and implement
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
69883
SORNA. The justification of these
requirements as means of furthering
SORNA’s objectives is explained in the
preamble to this regulation and in
previous SORNA-related documents,
including the rulemaking entitled
‘‘Applicability of the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act,’’ 75
FR 81849 (final rule), 72 FR 8894
(interim rule); the SORNA Guidelines,
73 FR 38030; and the SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines, 76 FR 1630.
The Office of Management and Budget
has determined that this rule is a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), and
accordingly this rule has been reviewed
by the Office of Management and
Budget.
The Department of Justice expects
that the rule will not entail new costs
and will result in a number of benefits.
For registration jurisdictions, there are
no new costs because their requirements
under SORNA continue to be those
articulated in the previously issued
SORNA guidelines. Likewise, for sex
offenders, the requirements articulated
in the rule either appear expressly in
SORNA or have previously been
articulated by the Attorney General in
the SORNA guidelines. The procedures
by which sex offenders register will
continue to depend on the registration
processes of the jurisdictions that
register them, which will not be made
more time-consuming or expensive or
otherwise changed by this rule.
In terms of benefits, the rule will
provide in one place a clear, concise,
and comprehensive statement of sex
offenders’ registration requirements
under SORNA. This will reduce any
expenditure by sex offenders of time or
money required for inquiry with state or
Federal authorities or others to resolve
uncertainties, or required in attempting
to comply with perceived registration
requirements under SORNA that go
beyond the requirements the Attorney
General has actually specified. The
clarity provided by this rule will make
it easier for sex offenders to determine
what SORNA requires them to do and
thereby facilitate compliance with
SORNA.
There are also expected benefits for
the government. As the preamble
explains, the rule’s comprehensive
articulation of SORNA’s registration
requirements in regulations addressed
to sex offenders will provide a secure
basis for Federal prosecution of
knowing violations of any of SORNA’s
requirements. It will resolve specific
problems that have arisen in past
litigation or can be expected to arise in
future litigation if not clarified and
resolved by this rule, thereby avoiding
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
69884
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
the expenditure of litigation resources
on these matters. As discussed in the
preamble, previously or potentially
litigated matters this rule elucidates
include such issues as the starting point
and duration of registration periods
under SORNA, the applicability of
SORNA’s requirements to all sex
offenders regardless of when they were
convicted, the particular jurisdictions in
which sex offenders are required to
report changes in registration
information, the requirement that
relocating sex offenders notify a
registration jurisdiction prior to
departure, the time frame for reporting
intended international travel, the mens
rea (state of mind) requirement for
violation of SORNA’s criminal
provision (18 U.S.C. 2250), and the
contours of the impossibility defense
under that provision.
As explained in the existing SORNA
guidelines, SORNA aims to prevent the
commission of sex offenses, and to bring
the perpetrators of such offenses to
justice more speedily and reliably, by
enabling the authorities to better
identify, track, and monitor released sex
offenders and by informing the public
regarding the presence of released sex
offenders in the community. See 73 FR
at 38044–45. Hence, by facilitating the
enforcement of, and compliance with,
SORNA’s registration requirements, and
enhancing the basis for public
notification, the rule is expected to
further SORNA’s public safety
objectives and reduce the time and
resources required in achieving these
objectives.
Executive Order 13132—Federalism
This regulation will not have
substantial direct effects on the states,
on the relationship between the national
Government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. There has been
substantial consultation with state
officials regarding the interpretation and
implementation of SORNA. The
previously issued SORNA Guidelines
and SORNA Supplemental Guidelines
articulate the requirements for
implementation of the SORNA
standards by states and other
jurisdictions in their sex offender
registration and notification programs,
requirements that are not changed by
this regulation’s provision of a separate
statement of the registration obligations
of sex offenders under SORNA.
Therefore, in accordance with Executive
Order 13132, it is determined that this
rule does not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation
of a federalism assessment.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice
Reform
This regulation meets the applicable
standards set forth in section 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
This rule will not result in the
expenditure by state, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
in any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Therefore, no actions were
deemed necessary under the provisions
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995. This rule adds provisions to
part 72 of title 28 of the Code of Federal
Regulations that articulate SORNA’s
registration requirements for sex
offenders, including where, when, and
how long sex offenders must register,
what information they must provide,
and how they must keep their
registrations current. The Attorney
General has previously addressed these
matters and has resolved them in the
same way in the SORNA Guidelines,
appearing at 73 FR 38030, and in the
SORNA Supplemental Guidelines,
appearing at 76 FR 1630. Those
previously issued sets of guidelines
determine what state, local, and tribal
jurisdictions must do to achieve
substantial implementation of the
SORNA standards in their registration
programs. Reiteration of some of these
requirements in a concise set of
directions to sex offenders in this rule
will not change what jurisdictions need
to do to implement SORNA or affect
their costs in doing so.
Congressional Review Act
This rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by the Congressional Review
Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The Department of
Justice will submit the report required
by 5 U.S.C. 801 to each House of
Congress and the Comptroller General.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 72
Crime, Information, Law enforcement,
Prisoners, Prisons, Probation and parole,
Records.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in
the preamble, amend chapter I of title 28
of the Code of Federal Regulations by
revising part 72 to read as follows:
PART 72—SEX OFFENDER
REGISTRATION AND NOTIFICATION
Sec.
72.1
72.2
72.3
PO 00000
Purpose.
Definitions.
Applicability of the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act.
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
72.4
72.5
72.6
Where sex offenders must register.
How long sex offenders must register.
Information sex offenders must
provide.
72.7 How sex offenders must register and
keep the registration current.
72.8 Liability for violations.
Authority: 34 U.S.C. 20901–45; Pub. L.
109–248, 120 Stat. 587; Pub. L. 114–119, 130
Stat. 15.
§ 72.1
Purpose.
(a) This part specifies the registration
requirements of the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act
(SORNA), 34 U.S.C. 20901 et seq., and
the scope of those requirements’
application. The Attorney General has
the authority to specify the
requirements of SORNA and their
applicability as provided in this part
pursuant to provisions of SORNA,
including 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(d),
and 20914(a)(8), (c).
(b) This part does not preempt or limit
any obligations of or requirements
relating to sex offenders under other
Federal laws, rules, or policies, or under
the laws, rules, or policies of
registration jurisdictions or other
entities. States and other governmental
entities may prescribe registration
requirements and other requirements,
with which sex offenders must comply,
that are more extensive or stringent than
those prescribed by SORNA.
§ 72.2
Definitions.
All terms used in this part have the
same meaning as in SORNA.
§ 72.3 Applicability of the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act.
The requirements of SORNA apply to
all sex offenders. All sex offenders must
comply with all requirements of that
Act, regardless of when the conviction
of the offense for which registration is
required occurred (including if the
conviction occurred before the
enactment of that Act), regardless of
whether a jurisdiction in which
registration is required has substantially
implemented that Act’s requirements or
has implemented any particular
requirement of that Act, and regardless
of whether any particular requirement
or class of sex offenders is mentioned in
examples in this regulation or in other
regulations or guidelines issued by the
Attorney General.
Example 1 to § 72.3. A sex offender is
federally convicted of aggravated sexual
abuse under 18 U.S.C. 2241 in 1990 and
is released following imprisonment in
2009. The sex offender is subject to the
requirements of SORNA and could be
held criminally liable under 18 U.S.C.
2250 for failing to register or keep the
registration current in any jurisdiction
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
in which the sex offender resides, is an
employee, or is a student.
Example 2 to § 72.3. A sex offender is
convicted by a state jurisdiction in 1997
for molesting a child and is released
following imprisonment in 2000. The
sex offender initially registers as
required but relocates to another state in
2009 and fails to register in the new
state of residence. The sex offender has
violated the requirement under SORNA
to register in any jurisdiction in which
he resides, and could be held criminally
liable under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for the
violation because he traveled in
interstate commerce.
§ 72.4
Where sex offenders must register.
A sex offender must register, and keep
the registration current, in each
jurisdiction in which the offender
resides, is an employee, or is a student.
For initial registration purposes only, a
sex offender must also register in the
jurisdiction in which convicted if that
jurisdiction is different from the
jurisdiction of residence.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
§ 72.5 How long sex offenders must
register.
(a) Duration. A sex offender has a
continuing obligation to register and
keep the registration current (except
when the sex offender is in custody or
civilly committed) for the following
periods of time:
(1) 15 years, if the offender is a tier
I sex offender;
(2) 25 years, if the offender is a tier
II sex offender; and
(3) The life of the offender, if the
offender is a tier III sex offender.
(b) Commencement. The registration
period begins to run:
(1) When a sex offender is released
from imprisonment following
conviction for the offense giving rise to
the registration requirement, including
in cases in which the term of
imprisonment is based wholly or in part
on the sex offender’s conviction for
another offense; or
(2) If the sex offender is not sentenced
to imprisonment, when the sex offender
is sentenced for the offense giving rise
to the registration requirement.
(c) Reduction. If a tier I sex offender
has maintained for 10 years a clean
record, as described in 34 U.S.C.
20915(b)(1), the period for which the
sex offender must register and keep the
registration current under paragraph (a)
of this section is reduced by 5 years. If
a tier III sex offender required to register
on the basis of a juvenile delinquency
adjudication has maintained a clean
record, as described in 34 U.S.C.
20915(b)(1), for 25 years, the period for
which the sex offender must register
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
and keep the registration current under
paragraph (a) of this section is reduced
to the period for which the clean record
has been maintained.
69885
passport the sex offender has and, if the
sex offender is an alien, information
about any document or documents
establishing the sex offender’s
immigration status, including passport
§ 72.6 Information sex offenders must
or immigration document type and
provide.
number.
Sex offenders must provide the
(f) Vehicle information. The license
following information for inclusion in
plate number and a description of any
the sex offender registries of the
vehicle owned or operated by the sex
jurisdictions in which they are required offender, including watercraft and
to register:
aircraft in addition to land vehicles. If
(a) Name, date of birth, and Social
a vehicle has no license plate but has
Security number. (1) The name of the
some other type of registration number
sex offender, including any alias used
or identifier, then the registration
by the sex offender.
number or identifier must be provided.
(2) The sex offender’s date of birth
Information must also be provided as to
and any date that the sex offender uses
where any vehicle owned or operated by
as his purported date of birth.
(3) The Social Security number of the the sex offender is habitually parked,
docked, or otherwise kept.
sex offender and any number that the
(g) Professional licenses. Information
sex offender uses as his purported
concerning all licensing of the sex
Social Security number.
(b) Remote communication identifiers. offender that authorizes the sex offender
to engage in an occupation or carry out
All designations the sex offender uses
a trade or business.
for purposes of routing or selfidentification in internet or telephonic
§ 72.7 How sex offenders must register
communications or postings, including
and keep the registration current.
email addresses and telephone numbers.
(a) Initial registration—(1) In general.
(c) Residence, temporary lodging,
Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2)
employment, and school attendance. (1)
of this section, a sex offender must
The address of each residence at which
register before release from
the sex offender resides or will reside
imprisonment following conviction for
or, if the sex offender has no present or
the offense giving rise to the registration
expected residence address, other
requirement, or, if the sex offender is
information describing where the sex
not sentenced to imprisonment, within
offender resides or will reside with
three business days after being
whatever definiteness is possible under
sentenced for that offense.
the circumstances.
(2) Special rules for certain cases. The
(2) Information about any place in
following
special requirements apply:
which the sex offender is staying when
(i) Federal and military offenders. A
away from his residence for seven or
more days, including the identity of the sex offender who is released from
Federal or military custody, or who is
place and the period of time the sex
convicted for a Federal or military sex
offender is staying there.
(3) The name and address of any place offense but not sentenced to
imprisonment, must register within
where the sex offender is or will be an
three business days of entering or
employee or, if the sex offender is or
remaining in a jurisdiction to reside
will be employed but with no fixed
place of employment, other information following the release or sentencing.
(ii) Foreign convictions. A sex
describing where the sex offender works
or will work with whatever definiteness offender required to register on the basis
of a conviction in a foreign country
is possible under the circumstances.
(4) The name and address of any place must register within three business days
of entering any jurisdiction in the
where the sex offender is a student or
United States to reside, work, or attend
will be a student.
school.
(d) International travel. Information
(b) Periodic in-person verification. A
relating to intended travel outside the
United States, including any anticipated sex offender must appear in person,
allow the jurisdiction to take a current
itinerary, dates and places of departure
photograph, and verify the information
from, arrival in, or return to the United
in each registry in which the offender is
States and each country visited, carrier
required to register. In carrying out the
and flight numbers for air travel,
required verification of information in
destination country or countries and
each registry, the sex offender must
address or other contact information
correct any information that has
therein, and means and purpose of
changed or is otherwise inaccurate and
travel.
must report any new registration
(e) Passports and immigration
information. A sex offender must appear
documents. Information about each
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
69886
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
in person for these purposes not less
frequently than—
(1) Each year, if the offender is a tier
I sex offender;
(2) Every six months, if the offender
is a tier II sex offender; and
(3) Every three months, if the offender
is a tier III sex offender.
(c) Reporting of initiation and changes
concerning name, residence,
employment, and school attendance. A
sex offender who enters a jurisdiction to
reside, or who resides in a jurisdiction
and changes his name or his place of
residence in the jurisdiction, must
appear in person in that jurisdiction and
register or update the registration within
three business days. A sex offender who
commences employment or school
attendance in a jurisdiction, or who
changes employer, school attended, or
place of employment or school
attendance in a jurisdiction, must
appear in person in that jurisdiction and
register or update the registration within
three business days.
(d) Reporting of departure and
termination concerning residence,
employment, and school attendance. (1)
A sex offender residing in a jurisdiction
must inform that jurisdiction (by
whatever means the jurisdiction allows)
if the sex offender will be commencing
residence, employment, or school
attendance in another jurisdiction or
outside of the United States. The sex
offender must so inform the jurisdiction
in which he is residing prior to any
termination of residence in that
jurisdiction and prior to commencing
residence, employment, or school
attendance in the other jurisdiction or
outside of the United States.
(2) A sex offender who will be
terminating residence, employment, or
school attendance in a jurisdiction must
so inform that jurisdiction (by whatever
means the jurisdiction allows) prior to
the termination of residence,
employment, or school attendance in
the jurisdiction.
(e) Reporting of changes in
information relating to remote
communication identifiers, temporary
lodging, and vehicles. A sex offender
must report within three business days
to his residence jurisdiction (by
whatever means the jurisdiction allows)
any change in remote communication
identifier information, as described in
§ 72.6(b), temporary lodging
information, as described in § 72.6(c)(2),
and any change in vehicle information,
as described in § 72.6(f).
(f) Reporting of international travel. A
sex offender must report intended travel
outside the United States, including the
information described in § 72.6(d), to
his residence jurisdiction (by whatever
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
means the jurisdiction allows). The sex
offender must report the travel
information to the jurisdiction at least
21 days in advance of the intended
travel and, if the sex offender is
terminating his residence in the
jurisdiction, prior to his termination of
residence in the jurisdiction.
(g) Compliance with jurisdictions’
requirements for registering and keeping
the registration current. (1) A sex
offender who does not comply with a
requirement of SORNA in conformity
with the time and manner specifications
of paragraphs (a) through (f) of this
section must comply with the
requirement in conformity with any
applicable time and manner
specifications of a jurisdiction in which
the offender is required to register.
Example 1 to paragraph (g)(1). A sex
offender convicted in a state does not
initially register before release from
imprisonment, as required by 34 U.S.C.
20913(b)(1) and paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, because the state has no
procedure for pre-release registration of
sex offenders. Instead, the state informs
sex offenders that they must go to a
local police station within seven days of
release to register. The sex offender
must comply with the state’s
requirements for initial registration, i.e.,
the offender must report to the police
station to register within seven days of
release.
Example 2 to paragraph (g)(1). A sex
offender does not register when he is
released from custody, or does not
register upon entering a jurisdiction to
reside as required by 34 U.S.C. 20913(c)
and paragraph (c) of this section,
because the jurisdiction, at the time,
does not register sex offenders based on
the offense for which he was convicted.
The jurisdiction later sends the sex
offender a notice advising that it has
extended its registration requirements to
include sex offenders like him and
directing him to report to a specified
agency within 90 days to register. The
sex offender must report to the agency
to register within the specified
timeframe.
Example 3 to paragraph (g)(1). A sex
offender registers as required when
released from imprisonment or upon
entering a jurisdiction to reside, but the
jurisdiction has no procedure for sex
offenders to appear periodically in
person to update and verify the
registration information as required by
34 U.S.C. 20918 and paragraph (b) of
this section. The jurisdiction later sends
the sex offender a notice advising that
it has adopted a periodic verification
requirement and directing the sex
offender to appear at a designated time
and place for an initial update meeting.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
The sex offender must appear and
update the registration as directed.
Example 4 to paragraph (g)(1). A sex
offender does not report his email
address to the jurisdiction in which he
resides when he initially registers, or
within three business days of a change
as required by paragraph (e) of this
section, because email addresses are not
among the information the jurisdiction
accepts for inclusion in its registry. The
jurisdiction later notifies the sex
offender that it has extended the
registration information it collects to
include email addresses and directs him
to send a reply within a specified time
that provides his current email address.
The sex offender must comply with this
direction.
(2) In a prosecution under 18 U.S.C.
2250, paragraph (g)(1) of this section
does not in any case relieve a sex
offender of the need to establish as an
affirmative defense an inability to
comply with SORNA because of
circumstances beyond his control as
provided in 18 U.S.C. 2250(c) and
§ 72.8(a)(2).
§ 72.8
Liability for violations.
(a) Criminal liability—(1) Offense. (i)
A sex offender may be liable to criminal
penalties under 18 U.S.C. 2250(a) if the
sex offender—
(A) Is required to register under
SORNA;
(B)(1) Is a sex offender as defined for
the purposes of SORNA by reason of a
conviction under Federal law (including
the Uniform Code of Military Justice),
the law of the District of Columbia,
Indian tribal law, or the law of any
territory or possession of the United
States; or
(2) Travels in interstate or foreign
commerce, or enters or leaves, or resides
in, Indian country; and
(C) Knowingly fails to register or
update a registration as required by
SORNA.
(ii) A sex offender may be liable to
criminal penalties under 18 U.S.C.
2250(b) if the sex offender—
(A) Is required to register under
SORNA;
(B) Knowingly fails to provide
information required by SORNA relating
to intended travel in foreign commerce;
and
(C) Engages or attempts to engage in
the intended travel in foreign
commerce.
(iii) As a condition of liability under
18 U.S.C. 2250(a)–(b) for failing to
comply with a requirement of SORNA,
a sex offender must have been aware of
the requirement he is charged with
violating, but need not have been aware
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES3
that the requirement is imposed by
SORNA.
(2) Defense. A sex offender may have
an affirmative defense to liability, as
provided in 18 U.S.C. 2250(c), if
uncontrollable circumstances prevented
the sex offender from complying with
SORNA, where the sex offender did not
contribute to the creation of those
circumstances in reckless disregard of
the requirement to comply and
complied as soon as the circumstances
preventing compliance ceased to exist.
Example 1 to paragraph (a)(2). A sex
offender changes residence from one
jurisdiction to another, bringing into
play SORNA’s requirement to register in
each jurisdiction where the sex offender
resides and SORNA’s requirement to
appear in person and report changes of
residence within three business days.
See 34 U.S.C. 20913(a), (c). The sex
offender attempts to comply with these
requirements by contacting the local
sheriff’s office, which is responsible for
sex offender registration in the
destination jurisdiction. The sheriff’s
office advises that it cannot schedule an
appointment for him to register within
three business days but that he should
come by in a week. The sex offender
would have a defense to liability if he
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 07, 2021
Jkt 256001
appeared at the sheriff’s office at the
appointed time and registered as
required. The sex offender’s temporary
inability to register and inability to
report the change of residence within
three business days in the new
residence jurisdiction was due to a
circumstance beyond his control—the
sheriff office’s refusal to meet with him
until a week had passed—and he
complied with the requirement to
register as soon as the circumstance
preventing compliance ceased to exist.
Example 2 to paragraph (a)(2). A sex
offender cannot register in a state in
which he resides because its registration
authorities will not register offenders on
the basis of the offense for which the sex
offender was convicted. The sex
offender would have a defense to
liability because the state’s
unwillingness to register sex offenders
like him is a circumstance beyond his
control. However, if the sex offender
failed to register after becoming aware of
a change in state policy or practice
allowing his registration, the 18 U.S.C.
2250(c) defense would no longer apply,
because in such a case the circumstance
preventing compliance with the
registration requirement would no
longer exist.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
69887
Example 3 to paragraph (a)(2). A sex
offender needs to travel to a foreign
country on short notice—less than 21
days—because of an unforeseeable
family or work emergency. The sex
offender would have a defense to
liability for failing to report the
intended travel 21 days in advance, as
required by § 72.7(f), because it is
impossible to report an intention to
travel outside the United States before
the intention exists. However, if the sex
offender failed to inform the registration
jurisdiction (albeit on short notice) once
he intended to travel, 18 U.S.C. 2250(c)
would not excuse that failure, because
the preventing circumstance—absence
of an intent to travel abroad—would no
longer exist.
(b) Supervision condition. For a sex
offender convicted of a Federal offense,
compliance with SORNA is a mandatory
condition of probation, supervised
release, and parole. The release of such
an offender who does not comply with
SORNA may be revoked.
Dated: November 29, 2021.
Merrick B. Garland,
Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2021–26420 Filed 12–7–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–18–P
E:\FR\FM\08DER3.SGM
08DER3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 233 (Wednesday, December 8, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69856-69887]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26420]
[[Page 69855]]
Vol. 86
Wednesday,
No. 233
December 8, 2021
Part IV
Department of Justice
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
28 CFR Part 72
Registration Requirements Under the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 86 , No. 233 / Wednesday, December 8, 2021 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 69856]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Part 72
[Docket No. OAG 157; AG Order No. 5244-2021]
RIN 1105-AB52
Registration Requirements Under the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act
AGENCY: Office of the Attorney General, Department of Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Justice is adopting a rule that specifies
the registration requirements under the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act (``SORNA''). The rule in part reflects express
requirements of SORNA and in part reflects the exercise of authorities
SORNA grants to the Attorney General to interpret and implement SORNA's
requirements. SORNA's requirements have previously been delineated in
guidelines issued by the Attorney General for implementation of SORNA's
requirements by registration jurisdictions.
DATES: This rule is effective January 7, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David J. Karp, Senior Counsel, Office
of Legal Policy, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, 202-514-
3273.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule finalizes a proposed rule,
Registration Requirements Under the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act (OAG 157; RIN 1105-AB52) (published August 13, 2020,
at 85 FR 49332).
Overview
The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (``SORNA''),
which is title I of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of
2006, Public Law 109-248, 34 U.S.C. 20901 et seq., establishes national
standards for sex offender registration and notification in the United
States. SORNA has a dual character, imposing registration obligations
on sex offenders as a matter of Federal law that are federally
enforceable under circumstances supporting Federal jurisdiction, see 18
U.S.C. 2250, and providing minimum national standards that non-Federal
jurisdictions are expected to incorporate in their sex offender
registration and notification programs, subject to a reduction of
Federal funding for those that fail to do so, see 34 U.S.C. 20912(a),
20926-27.
The Justice Department's Office of Sex Offender Sentencing,
Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (``SMART Office'')
administers the national standards for sex offender registration and
notification under SORNA and assists all jurisdictions in implementing
the SORNA standards in their programs. See id. 20945. As provided by
SORNA, the Department of Justice also (i) prosecutes SORNA violations
by sex offenders committed under circumstances supporting Federal
jurisdiction, see 18 U.S.C. 2250; (ii) assists in the enforcement of
sex offender registration requirements through the activities of the
U.S. Marshals Service, see 34 U.S.C. 20941; (iii) operates, through the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Sex Offender Registry,
which compiles the information obtained through the sex offender
registration programs of the states and other registration
jurisdictions and makes it available on a nationwide basis for law
enforcement purposes, see id. 20921; and (iv) operates the Dru Sjodin
National Sex Offender Public website, www.nsopw.gov, which provides
public access through a single national site to the information about
sex offenders posted on the public sex offender websites of the various
registration jurisdictions, see id. 20922.
SORNA generally directs the Attorney General to ``issue guidelines
and regulations to interpret and implement [SORNA].'' Id. 20912(b).
SORNA also authorizes the Attorney General to take more specific
actions in certain contexts.
One such provision is 34 U.S.C. 20913. That section states in
subsection (b) that sex offenders are generally to register initially
before release from imprisonment, or within three business days of
sentencing if not sentenced to imprisonment, but it provides further in
subsection (d) that the Attorney General has ``the authority to specify
the applicability of the requirements of [SORNA] to sex offenders
convicted before the enactment of [SORNA] 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).'' As discussed below in
connection with 28 CFR 72.3, section 20913(d) is not a constitutionally
impermissible delegation of legislative authority. Rather, it enables
the Attorney General to effectuate the legislative intent that SORNA
apply to all sex offenders, regardless of when they were convicted.
Another relevant provision lists several types of information that
sex offenders must provide for inclusion in sex offender registries,
and states that sex offenders must also provide ``[a]ny other
information required by the Attorney General.'' Id. 20914(a)(8). This
provision as well is not an impermissible delegation of legislative
authority, but rather is instrumental to the Attorney General's
effectuating the legislative objective to ``protect the public from sex
offenders and offenders against children'' by ``establish[ing] a
comprehensive national system for the registration of those
offenders.'' Id. 20901; see 73 FR at 38054-57; 76 FR at 1637. The
Attorney General's exercise of the authority under section 20914(a)(8)
is limited to requiring additional information that furthers the
legislative public safety objective or the implementation or
enforcement of SORNA's provisions. How that has been done is explained
below in connection with 28 CFR 72.6 and 72.7.
The Attorney General has exercised these authorities in previous
rulemakings and issuances of guidelines under SORNA, as detailed in the
rulemaking history and section-by-section analysis below, and the
interpretations and policy decisions in this rule follow those already
adopted in existing SORNA-related documents. The present rule provides
a concise and comprehensive statement of what sex offenders must do to
comply with SORNA's requirements.
In addition to SORNA's original provisions, described above, this
rulemaking draws on and implements provisions of the International
Megan's Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes
Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders
(``International Megan's Law''), Public Law 114-119. Section 6 of
International Megan's Law amended SORNA by (i) redesignating, in 34
U.S.C. 20914(a), former paragraph (7) as paragraph (8) and adding a new
paragraph (7) that requires a sex offender to provide for inclusion in
the sex offender registry information relating to intended travel
outside the United States, including several specified types of
information ``and any other itinerary or other travel-related
information required by the Attorney General''; (ii) adding a new
subsection (c) to 34 U.S.C. 20914 that requires sex offenders to
provide and update registration information required by SORNA ``in
conformity with any time and manner requirements prescribed by the
Attorney General''; and (iii) adding a new subsection (b) to SORNA's
criminal provision, 18 U.S.C. 2250, that specifically reaches
international travel reporting violations.
This rulemaking is not innovative in terms of policy. Many of the
requirements it articulates reflect
[[Page 69857]]
express SORNA requirements. These include, inter alia, statutory
specifications about (i) where and when sex offenders must register;
(ii) several categories of required registration information; (iii) how
long sex offenders must continue to register, including different
registration periods for sex offenders in different tiers and lifetime
registration for those in the highest tier; and (iv) a requirement to
appear periodically to verify the registration information. See 34
U.S.C. 20911(2)-(4), 20913, 20914(a)(1)-(7), 20915, 20918.
Other features of the rule reflect exercises of the Attorney
General's powers to implement SORNA's requirements. These include
additional specifications regarding information sex offenders must
provide, how and when they must report certain changes in registration
information, and the time and manner for complying with SORNA's
registration requirements by sex offenders who cannot comply with
SORNA's normal registration procedures. On these matters, however, the
rule embodies the same policies as those appearing in the previously
issued SORNA guidelines and prior rulemakings under SORNA.
The rule also makes no change in what registration jurisdictions
need to do to substantially implement SORNA in their registration
programs, a matter that will continue to be governed by the previously
issued guidelines for SORNA implementation.
While this rule does not make new policy, as discussed above, it is
expected to have a number of benefits. The rule will facilitate
enforcement of SORNA's registration requirements through prosecution of
noncompliant sex offenders under 18 U.S.C. 2250. By providing a
comprehensive articulation of SORNA's registration requirements in
regulations addressed to sex offenders, it will provide a more secure
basis for prosecution of sex offenders who engage in knowing violations
of any of SORNA's requirements. It will also resolve a number of
specific concerns that have arisen in past litigation or could be
expected to arise in future litigation, if not clarified and resolved
by this rule. For example, as discussed below, the amendment of Sec.
72.3 in the rule will ensure that its application of SORNA's
requirements to sex offenders with pre-SORNA convictions is given
effect consistently, resolving an issue resulting from the decision in
United States v. DeJarnette, 741 F.3d 971 (9th Cir. 2013).
Beyond the benefits to effective enforcement of SORNA's
requirements, the rule will benefit sex offenders by providing a clear
and comprehensive statement of their registration obligations under
SORNA. This statement will make it easier for sex offenders to
determine what they are required to do and thus facilitate compliance.
By facilitating the enforcement of, and compliance with, SORNA's
registration requirements, the rule will further SORNA's public safety
objectives. See 34 U.S.C. 20901. More consistent adherence to these
requirements will enable registration and law enforcement authorities
to better track and monitor released sex offenders in the community and
enhance the basis for public notification regarding registered sex
offenders that SORNA requires. See id. 20920, 20923.
Effective September 1, 2017, the provisions of SORNA, formerly
appearing at 42 U.S.C. 16901 et seq., were recodified in a new title 34
of the United States Code, and now appear at 34 U.S.C. 20901 et seq.
See https://uscode.house.gov/editorialreclassification/t34/.
United States Code citations of SORNA provisions in this rule
accordingly differ from the corresponding citations in earlier sources
and documents.
Rulemaking History
This rule is the tenth document the Attorney General has published
pursuant to the statutory directive to the Attorney General to issue
guidelines and regulations to interpret and implement SORNA. See 34
U.S.C. 20912(b). The previous SORNA-related documents are as follows:
(1) Interim rule entitled, ``Applicability of the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act,'' published at 72 FR 8894 (Feb. 28,
2007). The interim rule solicited public comments, and the comment
period ended on April 30, 2007. The interim rule added a new part 72 to
title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations, entitled ``Sex Offender
Registration and Notification.'' The interim rule provided that ``[t]he
requirements of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act
apply to all sex offenders, including sex offenders convicted of the
offense for which registration is required prior to the enactment of
that Act.'' 28 CFR 72.3.
(2) Proposed guidelines, published at 72 FR 30210 (May 30, 2007),
whose general purpose was to provide guidance and assistance to
registration jurisdictions in implementing the SORNA standards in their
sex offender registration and notification programs. The proposed
guidelines solicited public comment, and the comment period ended on
August 1, 2007.
(3) Final guidelines for registration jurisdictions regarding SORNA
implementation entitled, ``The National Guidelines for Sex Offender
Registration and Notification'' (the ``SORNA Guidelines''), published
at 73 FR 38030 (July 2, 2008).
(4) Proposed supplemental guidelines for SORNA implementation,
published at 75 FR 27362 (May 14, 2010), whose general purpose was to
address certain issues arising in SORNA implementation that required
that some aspects of the SORNA Guidelines be augmented or modified. The
proposed supplemental guidelines solicited public comment, and the
comment period closed on July 13, 2010.
(5) Final rule entitled, ``Applicability of the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act,'' published at 75 FR 81849 (Dec. 29,
2010). This rule finalized the February 28, 2007, interim rule
providing for SORNA's applicability to all sex offenders, including
those with pre-SORNA convictions.
(6) Final supplemental guidelines for SORNA implementation
entitled, ``Supplemental Guidelines for Sex Offender Registration and
Notification'' (the ``SORNA Supplemental Guidelines''), published at 76
FR 1630 (Jan. 11, 2011).
(7) Proposed supplemental guidelines, published at 81 FR 21397
(Apr. 11, 2016), whose general purpose was to afford registration
jurisdictions greater flexibility in their efforts to substantially
implement SORNA's juvenile registration requirement. These proposed
supplemental guidelines solicited public comment, and the comment
period closed on June 10, 2016.
(8) Final supplemental guidelines regarding substantial
implementation of SORNA's juvenile registration requirement entitled,
``Supplemental Guidelines for Juvenile Registration Under the Sex
Offender Registration and Notification Act,'' published at 81 FR 50552
(Aug. 1, 2016).
(9) Proposed rule entitled, ``Registration Requirements Under the
Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act,'' published at 85 FR
49332 (Aug. 13, 2020). The proposed rule solicited public comments and
the comment period closed on October 13, 2020.
Summary of Comments
The Department of Justice received over 700 comments on this
rulemaking from individuals and organizations. Most of the comments
amounted to general criticisms of sex offender registration or SORNA.
Some of the
[[Page 69858]]
comments proposed specific changes to the provisions of the proposed
rule. Having carefully considered all comments, the Department of
Justice has concluded that the regulations in this rulemaking should be
promulgated without change from the proposed rule, except for amendment
of Sec. 72.8(a)(1)(i)-(ii) to specify the circumstances in which SORNA
violations may result in Federal criminal liability. The ensuing
discussion summarizes the principal issues that were raised in the
public comments.
General Comments
Most of the comments received amounted to general criticisms of sex
offender registration or associated public notification requirements.
Comments of this nature generally argued that sex offender registration
is of little or no value in protecting public safety and that any value
it may have is outweighed by adverse effects on sex offenders and their
families. Some comments in this class proposed that sex offender
registration be restricted, if not entirely eliminated, such as by
narrowly limiting the sex offenders or sex offenses for which
registration is required, ending disclosure of information about sex
offenders to the general public, setting shorter registration periods,
or providing broader means for terminating registration. Some of these
comments criticized requirements in this rule that track express
statutory requirements, including the statutory requirements relating
to the jurisdictions in which sex offenders must register, the
information sex offenders must provide, the duration of registration
periods, and reporting and verification of certain information through
in-person appearances. See 34 U.S.C. 20913-16, 20918.
These comments could not be accepted in this rulemaking because the
Attorney General has no authority to repeal the requirements enacted by
Congress in SORNA or the sex offender registration laws of non-Federal
jurisdictions. This rule interprets and implements SORNA, as directed
by 34 U.S.C. 20912(b). The Attorney General's regulatory authority
under SORNA does not include second-guessing the underlying legislative
policy judgments or nullifying the measures that Congress has adopted
in the law. See 73 FR at 38036.
Some comments criticized the rule's specification of registration
requirements which, wholly or in part, do not appear expressly in
SORNA. The matters criticized included requirements to provide
information about actual and purported dates of birth and Social
Security numbers, temporary lodging away from residence, passports and
immigration documents, and professional licenses. In addition to
comments criticizing the extent of the information required by the
rule, some comments in this class criticized requirements adopted by
the Attorney General to keep registration information up to date. These
include requirements to report in advance departure from a
jurisdiction, the requirement to report within three business days
changes relating to remote communication identifiers, temporary
lodging, and vehicle information, and the requirement to report
international travel at least 21 days in advance.
The Attorney General has adopted these measures in the exercise of
powers that SORNA provides to interpret and implement SORNA, specify
required registration information, and prescribe time-and-manner
requirements for providing and updating the information. See 34 U.S.C.
20912(b), 20914(a)(7)-(8), (c). Each of these measures is justified as
a means of furthering SORNA's objective of protecting the public from
sex offenders and offenders against children by establishing a
comprehensive national registration system, see id. 20901, or as a
means of implementing or enforcing SORNA's provisions. The specific
reasons for the various requirements are explained in the section-by-
section analysis below. The comments received provided no persuasive
grounds to abrogate or modify these requirements.
Some comments argued that SORNA or this rule are unconstitutional
on various grounds, such as the prohibitions of cruel and unusual
punishment, double jeopardy, and ex post facto laws, the right to
travel, and the requirement of due process. Claims of this nature are
familiar to the Department of Justice, having been raised in litigative
challenges to SORNA and rejected by the Federal courts. See, e.g.,
Willman v. Att'y Gen., 972 F.3d 819, 824-27 (6th Cir. 2020). The
comments provided no persuasive reason to believe that any aspect of
SORNA or this rule is unconstitutional.
Some comments objected to the application of SORNA's requirements
to sex offenders whose offenses or convictions predate SORNA, as
provided in Sec. 72.3 in this rule. Section 72.3 is necessary to
implement Congress's intent that SORNA apply to all sex offenders,
regardless of when they were convicted. See Reynolds v. United States,
565 U.S. 432, 442-45 (2012); id. at 448-49 & n. (Scalia, J.,
dissenting) (agreeing that Congress intended for SORNA to apply to all
sex offenders); Gundy v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2116, 2123-30 (2019)
(plurality opinion). The section-by-section analysis below provides
further explanation of the provisions and rationale of Sec. 72.3.
Some comments objected to substantive restrictions imposed on sex
offenders in some jurisdictions, such as restrictions on where they can
live, prohibitions of proximity to schools or children, or exclusion
from some types of employment. These comments are not germane to this
rule, which articulates SORNA's registration requirements for sex
offenders, because SORNA's requirements are informational in nature and
do not restrict where sex offenders can go or what they can do. See 73
FR at 38032. A similar response applies to comments that were critical
of requirements under other laws that identification documents, such as
passports and drivers' licenses, include notations identifying the
holders as sex offenders. These comments are misdirected in relation to
this rule because SORNA does not impose such requirements, and, where
they are prescribed by other laws, the Attorney General has no
authority to rescind or modify them by rulemaking.
Some comments criticized public disclosure of information about sex
offenders, arguing that access to information in the sex offender
registries should be limited to law enforcement or otherwise narrowly
restricted. These comments concern the scope of disclosure of sex
offender information by registration jurisdictions and, as such, are
not germane to this rule, which concerns SORNA's registration
requirements for sex offenders. Disclosure of sex offender information
is separately addressed in statutory provisions that are not implicated
by this rulemaking and in the SORNA Guidelines and SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines. See 34 U.S.C. 20916(c), 20920, 20922-23; 73 FR at 38042,
38058-61; 76 FR at 1632-33, 1636-37.
Some comments supported issuance of this rule. The benefits
perceived by these commenters included protecting public safety,
clarifying SORNA's registration requirements for sex offenders, and
promoting compliance with those requirements.
A Comment Proposing 10 Changes in the Rule
A lengthy comment proposed 10 specific changes in the rule:
(i) The comment proposed that the rule and each discrete
requirement therein should be revised to say that registrants need only
comply when
[[Page 69859]]
circumstances supporting Federal jurisdiction are present. Section
72.8(a)(1)(i)-(ii) in the final rule reproduces the required
jurisdictional circumstances under 18 U.S.C. 2250, making clear the
conditions that must be satisfied to support Federal criminal liability
for SORNA violations. It would be misleading or incorrect to state that
sex offenders need not comply with the requirements set forth in this
rule in a broader sense, absent grounds supporting Federal
jurisdiction, because those requirements are widely paralleled in the
sex offender registration laws of the states and other non-Federal
jurisdictions. See National Institute of Justice, Tracking Sex
Offenders: Federal Law, Resources Have Led to Marked Improvement of
State Registries, But More Work Is Needed (Nov. 13, 2020) (``At least
half the states met implementation thresholds for 13 of the 14 SORNA
standard areas; 75% of the states met the thresholds for at least nine
areas; and 92% of the states met them for at least half of the SORNA
areas.''). Sex offenders accordingly may be subject to criminal
penalties under state law for violating these requirements, regardless
of whether grounds for Federal jurisdiction exist. While Sec.
72.8(a)(1)(i)-(ii) has been revised in the final rule to state
explicitly the scope of Federal jurisdiction to prosecute SORNA
violations under 18 U.S.C. 2250, the comment was not persuasive that
the jurisdictional limitation should be referenced repeatedly
throughout the rule, since the statement in Sec. 72.8(a)(1)(i)-(ii) is
clear.
(ii) The comment proposed that the rule incorporate a clear
statement that a registrant's duty to act under SORNA arises only when
the registrant travels interstate and that travel has a nexus to the
alleged SORNA violation. In referring to a registrant's ``duty'' to
act, the comment apparently meant amenability to Federal prosecution
under 18 U.S.C. 2250 in case of a violation. The proposed change is
legally incorrect. The grounds of Federal jurisdiction under section
2250 include grounds other than interstate travel, such as conviction
for a Federal sex offense or travel in foreign commerce, and section
2250 specifies no required ``nexus'' between interstate travel and the
charged SORNA violation beyond the temporal sequencing implied by the
provision's language and structure. See Carr v. United States, 560 U.S.
438, 446 (2010).
(iii) The comment argued, based on the Supreme Court's decision in
Nichols v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1113 (2016), that the rule's
requirements to report departure from a jurisdiction and termination of
residence in a jurisdiction under Sec. 72.7(d) and (g) exceed the
Attorney General's powers under 34 U.S.C. 20914(a) and (c). Adopting
these requirements is within the Attorney General's powers under SORNA,
and consistent with the Nichols decision, as explained in the section-
by-section analysis below.
(iv) The comment proposed that the rule state that Sec. 72.7(g)
absolves registrants of a duty to report information required by SORNA
when state law or the local agency does not require that information.
The proposed statement is legally incorrect because SORNA's
requirements exist independently of state law requirements, see
Willman, 972 F.3d at 821-24, and it is not needed to avoid unfairness
to sex offenders based on differences between SORNA's requirements and
state law requirements. Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in this rule explains
that sex offenders are not held liable under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for
violation of registration requirements of which they are unaware, and
noncompliance with SORNA may be excused where compliance is prevented
by circumstances beyond their control, such as a jurisdiction's failure
to carry out a necessary complementary role. These principles apply to
all requirements under SORNA, including the requirement of Sec. 72.6
to provide specified types of information for inclusion in the
registry. Hence, a sex offender is not held liable for failing to
provide a type of information if he is unaware of a requirement to
provide that information, as may be the case if a jurisdiction does not
request that information in its registration forms, and failure to
provide any type of information may be excused if a jurisdiction will
not accept that information for inclusion in its registry.
(v) The comment asserted that the interpretation of the affirmative
defense of 18 U.S.C. 2250(c), in the analysis statement's discussion of
Sec. Sec. 72.7(g) and 72.8, violates due process because it shifts the
burden of proof to defendants. However, Sec. 72.8(a)(1)(iii) explains
that liability under 18 U.S.C. 2250(a)-(b) is conditioned on the
defendant's being aware of the requirement he is charged with
violating. The regulation and the accompanying analysis do not impose
on the defendant a burden of proving that he lacked such awareness.
Section 72.8(a)(2) states that there is an affirmative defense to
liability for noncompliance with SORNA in certain circumstances,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2250(c). The regulation and the accompanying
discussion do not change the burden of proof on this defense, which
Congress has expressly made an ``affirmative defense.'' Id.
(vi) The comment asserted that Sec. 72.6(b), requiring the
reporting of remote communication identifiers, violates the First
Amendment on grounds of ambiguity and because, the comment claimed, it
infringes on the right to anonymous speech unless accompanied by
restrictions on public disclosure of the identifiers. The rule's
specification of covered identifiers is similar to a statutory
definition in 34 U.S.C. 20916(e)(2) and sufficiently definite. The
conditions for disclosure of sex offender information by registration
jurisdictions are beyond the scope of this rulemaking, which concerns
the registration requirements for sex offenders under SORNA. Separate
statutory provisions and the SORNA Guidelines and SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines specify those conditions, which include restrictions on the
disclosure of remote communication identifiers. See 34 U.S.C. 20916(c);
73 FR at 38059-60; 76 FR at 1633, 1637.
(vii) The comment asserted that Sec. 72.8 is deficient because it
does not expressly refer to the required jurisdictional predicates
under 18 U.S.C. 2250. As formulated in this final rule, Sec. 72.8 sets
forth those jurisdictional predicates.
(viii) The comment asserted that the rule is impermissibly vague in
a number of respects, including its definition of remote communication
identifiers, the requirement that sex offenders lacking fixed residence
addresses or places of employment report the relevant locations with
whatever definiteness is possible under the circumstances, the
requirement that sex offenders report information concerning places
they are staying when away from their residences for seven or more
days, and the meaning of a ``clean record'' that may reduce the
registration period for certain sex offenders. However, the
specification of covered remote communication identifiers in Sec.
72.6(b) is similar to a statutory definition in 34 U.S.C. 20916(e)(2)
and sufficiently definite. Where sex offenders do not have definite
places of residence or employment, the information they provide under
Sec. 72.6(c)(1) and (c)(3) as to where they are living or working must
be of a less definite nature, and it is reasonable to require that the
information be provided with whatever definiteness is possible under
the circumstances. The matter is further explained in the section-by-
section analysis below and in 73 FR at 38056. The information required
by Sec. 72.6(c)(2)
[[Page 69860]]
is ``temporary lodging information'' and a related provision, Sec.
72.7(e), requires sex offenders to report this information to their
residence jurisdictions within three business days. The two provisions
adequately convey that a sex offender, within three business days of
returning to his residence, must report to the residence jurisdiction
the places he has lodged while away from his residence for seven or
more days. Section 72.5(c) refers to a ``clean record'' as described in
34 U.S.C. 20915(b)(1), so the meaning set forth in that statutory
provision applies.
(ix) The comment proposed that Sec. 72.5(c) should clarify that
clean record reductions for tier I offenders and (juvenile delinquent)
tier III offenders are automatic. Section 72.5(c) states that
satisfaction of the clean record requirement reduces the registration
period for the affected classes of sex offenders. The conditions a sex
offender must satisfy to effect such a reduction are those specified in
the applicable statute: ``(A) not being convicted of any offense for
which imprisonment for more than 1 year may be imposed; (B) not being
convicted of any sex offense; (C) successfully completing any periods
of supervised release, probation, and parole; and (D) successfully
completing of [sic] an appropriate sex offender treatment program
certified by a jurisdiction or by the Attorney General.'' 34 U.S.C.
20915(b)(1).
(x) The comment stated that the rule should be revised to include a
federalism assessment and other requirements under Executive Order
13132 and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. However, the relevant
regulatory certifications below are correct as they are. This rule
satisfies the requirements of Executive Order 13132 and the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act.
A Comment Proposing 13 Changes or Sets of Changes in the Rule
Another comment proposed the following changes in the rule:
(i) The comment argued that Sec. 72.5, relating to the duration of
the registration period under SORNA, should be changed in various ways.
It first argued that Sec. 72.5 as drafted conflicts with a provision
of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which, the comment asserted, states
that arrests and convictions may only be reported on background checks
for seven years after release from prison. The reference is apparently
to 15 U.S.C. 1681c, which generally ``prohibits [consumer] reporting
agencies from disclosing any arrest record or other adverse item more
than seven years old but permits them to report `records of convictions
of crimes' no matter how long ago they occurred.'' Aldaco v. RentGrow,
Inc., 921 F.3d 685, 687 (7th Cir. 2019) (quoting 15 U.S.C. 1681c(a)).
Section 72.5 describes the duration of registration required by SORNA.
See 34 U.S.C. 20915. It does not affect what may be included in
consumer reports and does not conflict with the Fair Credit Reporting
Act. The comment also stated that Sec. 72.5 should be changed to
establish standardized procedures for determining sex offenders' tiers,
how long each offender will remain on the registry, and what
restrictions can be placed on registrants in compliance with their
constitutional rights, and should create a way for tier II offenders to
petition for early removal from the registry. The procedures for
registration jurisdictions to determine sex offenders' tiers are
outside the scope of this rulemaking, but the SORNA Guidelines provide
related guidance. See 73 FR at 38052-54. The duration of registration
under SORNA is governed by statutory criteria, see 34 U.S.C. 20915, and
cannot be changed by rulemaking. The statutes include no provision for
reducing the registration periods of tier II offenders. Id. Assessing
what restrictions can constitutionally be placed on sex offenders, such
as restrictions on where sex offenders may live or work, is outside the
scope of this rulemaking, which concerns SORNA's registration
requirements for sex offenders.
(ii) The comment criticized Sec. 72.6(b), relating to remote
communication identifiers, as likely violating the First Amendment and
overly vague. The comment provided no persuasive reason to believe that
Sec. 72.6(b) is unconstitutional. The description of covered remote
communication identifiers in Sec. 72.6(b) is similar to a statutory
definition appearing in 34 U.S.C. 20916(e)(2) and sufficiently
definite.
(iii) The comment claimed that Sec. 72.6(c)(2)'s requirement to
report temporary lodging information violates a constitutional right to
travel because, the comment asserted, most places of lodging will not
knowingly allow sex offenders to stay at their locations if a sex
offender's travel plans are disclosed to them. The rule requires sex
offenders to report temporary lodging information within three business
days, not in advance, and it requires reporting of the information to
the sex offender's residence jurisdiction, not the premises where he
intends to stay. See Sec. 72.7(e). The comment provided no persuasive
reason to believe that this requirement violates any constitutional
right.
(iv) The comment proposed to eliminate Sec. 72.6(c)(3), on the
ground that disclosure of sex offenders' employment information will
adversely affect the employers and adversely affect the sex offenders'
ability to obtain employment. Section 72.6 only requires sex offenders
to provide employment information to registration jurisdictions. It
does not address the public disclosure of such information and, more
broadly, the conditions for disclosure of information about sex
offenders are outside the scope of this rulemaking. The SORNA
Guidelines separately address the disclosure of sex offender
information, including employment information. See 73 FR at 38042-43,
38059.
(v) The comment claimed that Sec. 72.6(c)(4)'s requirement to
provide school attendance information violates a right to attend public
schools without hindrance from the government and a First Amendment
right of free association because, the comment asserted, most colleges
and universities will not allow registered sex offenders to enroll.
However, SORNA requires school attendance information, see 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(5), and that requirement cannot be abrogated by rulemaking.
Section 72.6(c)(4) requires sex offenders to provide school attendance
information for inclusion in the registries. It does not require or
encourage schools to deny enrollment to registered sex offenders, and
any schools that have such a policy would potentially deny admission to
registered sex offenders regardless of whether SORNA or this rule
requires sex offenders to provide school attendance information for
inclusion in the registries. The comment provided no persuasive reason
to believe that this requirement violates any provision of the
Constitution.
(vi) With respect to Sec. 72.6(d), which requires reporting of
international travel information, the comment stated that the U.S.
government should be prohibited from providing travel plans to foreign
nations. Congress made a contrary judgment in International Megan's
Law, whose purposes include, as stated in its title, ``[t]o protect
children and others from sexual abuse and exploitation, including sex
trafficking and sex tourism, by providing advance notice of intended
travel by registered sex offenders outside the United States to the
government of the country of destination''. Public Law 114-119; see Doe
v. Kerry, Case No. 16-cv-0654-PJH, 2016 WL 5339804 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 23,
2016), appeal dismissed, No. 16-17100, 2017 WL 5514566 (9th Cir. 2017)
[[Page 69861]]
(explaining the background and purposes of International Megan's Law
and rejecting a constitutional challenge).
(vii) The comment claimed that Sec. 72.6(g)'s requirement to
disclose professional licenses violates a right to engage in commerce
because states may revoke such licenses if notified that the licensee
is a registered sex offender. The rule does not require states to
revoke professional licenses issued to registered sex offenders.
Whether and to what extent criminal histories including sex offenses
should be disqualifying for professional licenses, such as licenses to
teach children or to be care providers for persons in vulnerable
populations, are matters for the states' judgment. The comment provided
no persuasive reason to believe that requiring sex offenders to report
professional licenses is unconstitutional.
(viii) With respect to Sec. 72.8, the comment asserted that the
jurisdictional predicate of travel in interstate or foreign commerce in
18 U.S.C. 2250 should be interpreted to apply only on the basis of
business-related travel. There is no basis for such a restriction; it
would depart from the interpretation of travel in interstate or foreign
commerce in other federal laws; and it would conflict with SORNA's
objective of reliably tracking sex offenders as they relocate among
jurisdictions or travel abroad.
(ix) With respect to Sec. 72.6(c)(3), which requires sex offenders
to report the names and addresses of places of employment, the comment
argued that this information should not be made public. The matter is
outside the scope of this rulemaking, which concerns the registration
requirements for sex offenders under SORNA, not the conditions for
disclosure of sex offender information by registration jurisdictions.
The SORNA Guidelines address the latter issue, including disclosure of
employment information. See 73 FR at 38042-43, 38059.
(x) The comment took issue with the regulatory certification below
relating to Executive Orders 12866 and 13563. The comment assumed that
the requirements in this rule are new requirements and hence will
result in increased costs for sex offenders and registration
jurisdictions. The premise is incorrect. As the regulatory
certification explains, there are no new costs for registration
jurisdictions because their requirements under SORNA continue to be
those articulated in the previously issued SORNA Guidelines and SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines. Likewise, for sex offenders, the requirements
articulated in the rule either appear expressly in SORNA or have
previously been articulated by the Attorney General in the SORNA
Guidelines and SORNA Supplemental Guidelines. This rule will not change
the registration procedures of the registration jurisdictions or make
those procedures more time-consuming or expensive. There is accordingly
no reason to change the relevant regulatory certification.
(xi) The comment took issue with the regulatory certification below
relating to Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), claiming that this rule
will have a significant impact on the relationship between the states
and the Federal government by creating Federal criminal penalties for
sex offenders who violate SORNA's requirements and by creating funding
reductions for states that do not implement SORNA's requirements in
their registration programs. The premise of this comment is incorrect
because the relevant Federal criminal penalties and funding incentive
have existed since SORNA's enactment in 2006. See 18 U.S.C. 2250; 34
U.S.C. 20927.
(xii) The comment took issue with the regulatory certification
relating to subtitle E of title II of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (the ``Congressional Review Act''),
assuming that the rule will result in novel requirements to provide and
disclose sex offenders' employment information with adverse effects on
sex offenders and their employers. The assumption is incorrect because
the requirements relating to employment information have existed for
many years in SORNA and the SORNA Guidelines. See 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(4); 73 FR 38042-43, 38059.
(xiii) With respect to Sec. 72.6(c)(2), the comment stated that
the rule must forbid a sex offender's home jurisdiction from routinely
notifying a jurisdiction to which a registrant plans to travel or
notifying a place of lodging that a registrant plans to stay there. The
comment argues that such notification violates a constitutional right
to travel because the destination jurisdictions may impose unwanted
requirements and restrictions on sex offenders if it is known they are
coming and the temporary lodging providers may not allow registered sex
offenders to stay on their properties. However, the rule requires sex
offenders to report temporary lodging information within three business
days, not in advance. See Sec. 72.7(e). If the residence jurisdiction
knows about the sex offender's travel plans in advance anyway, and
conveys the information to the destination jurisdiction or persons
therein, no persuasive reason appears to believe that doing so is
unconstitutional. Be that as it may, this rule concerns the
registration requirements for sex offenders under SORNA, and the
conditions for disclosure of information about sex offenders by
registration jurisdictions, including temporary lodging information,
are outside of its scope. The SORNA Guidelines separately address the
conditions for such disclosure. See 73 FR at 38058-61.
A Comment Proposing 24 Changes in the Rule
Another comment proposed 24 changes in the rule:
(i) With respect to Sec. 72.1, the comment stated that subsection
(b) should be revised to allow states to adopt requirements less
stringent than SORNA without fear of losing federal funds, or
alternatively, clarify the existing rule that states may adopt
registration requirements that are substantially similar to SORNA. The
matter is outside the scope of this rulemaking, which is concerned with
the registration requirements for sex offenders under SORNA, not the
requirements for registration jurisdictions. The funding reduction or
reallocation for jurisdictions that do not substantially implement
SORNA is a statutory matter and cannot be abrogated by rulemaking. See
34 U.S.C. 20927. The SORNA Guidelines and SORNA Supplemental Guidelines
explain the substantial implementation requirement and the funding
incentive. See 73 FR at 38047-48; 76 FR at 1638-39.
(ii) With respect to Sec. 72.3, the comment proposed removing the
application of SORNA based on pre-SORNA offenses, or specifying that
SORNA does not apply to sex offenders not already required to register
prior to SORNA's enactment. That conflicts with Congress's intent that
SORNA apply to all sex offenders, regardless of when they were
convicted, as discussed above and in the section-by-section analysis
below.
(iii) With respect to Sec. 72.5, the comment proposed clarifying
that classification of sex offenders should be based upon the risk
posed by offenses as represented by tier levels, and revising
subsection (c) to allow reductions for all levels consistent with
scientific research or recidivism risk. SORNA specifies the criteria
for its tier classifications and the conditions for reducing
registration periods. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(2)-(4); 20915. These matters
are determined by statute and cannot be changed by rulemaking.
(iv) With respect to Sec. 72.6(b), relating to remote
communication identifiers, the comment proposed clarifying that IP
[[Page 69862]]
addresses are not required and proposed stating that requiring
telephone numbers of ``known associates'' is a violation of privacy
laws. Section 72.6(b) requires that sex offenders provide the
designations they use for purposes of routing or self-identification in
internet or telephonic communications or postings, including email
addresses and telephone numbers. The specification of required
information, which is similar to a statutory definition appearing in 34
U.S.C. 20916(e)(2), is sufficiently clear as drafted, and does not
require sex offenders to provide IP addresses or the telephone numbers
of ``known associates.''
(v) With respect to Sec. 72.6(c), relating to provision of
information concerning residence, temporary lodging, employment, and
school attendance, the comment proposed providing grace periods for
registration to reflect that loss of housing and employment can occur
without warning and that it may take time to locate a replacement.
SORNA and the rule generally allow three business days to report
changes in residence, employment, and school attendance, or temporary
lodging information. See Sec. 72.7(c), (e). There is no need to
stipulate a ``grace period'' for sex offenders who have nothing within
the scope of Sec. 72.6(c) to report, as may be the case with a sex
offender who has just lost his residence or job and has no expectation
about where he will be living or working in the future.
(vi) The comment proposed eliminating Sec. 72.6(c)(2), relating to
temporary lodging information, or alternatively, specifying that this
information is not part of the public record and may not be promulgated
by third-party sites without penalty. The section-by-section analysis
below explains the justification for requiring temporary lodging
information. The conditions for public disclosure of information about
sex offenders by registration jurisdictions, including temporary
lodging information, are outside the scope of this rulemaking, which is
concerned with the registration requirements for sex offenders under
SORNA. The SORNA Guidelines separately address disclosure of sex
offender information by registration jurisdictions and do not require
registration jurisdictions to disclose sex offenders' temporary lodging
information on the public sex offender websites. See 73 FR at 38059.
The Attorney General has no authority to create penalties for third-
party sites that disclose sex offenders' temporary lodging information.
(vii) With respect to Sec. 72.6(c)(3), relating to employment
information, the comment proposed defining place of employment. Section
72.6(c)(3) is sufficiently clear as drafted, requiring the name and
address of any place where a sex offender is or will be an employee or,
for sex offenders who are or will be employed but with no fixed place
of employment, other information describing where the sex offender
works or will work with whatever definiteness is possible under the
circumstances. In referring to place of employment, the language of
Sec. 72.6(c)(3) tracks the statutory requirement that sex offenders
provide ``[t]he name and address of any place where the sex offender is
an employee or will be an employee,'' 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(4).
(viii) With respect to Sec. 72.6(c)(1), the comment proposed
defining residence, specifically asking how a person registers a
residence address if he is transient or homeless. The comment
identified no lack of clarity in Sec. 72.6(c)(1) that would require
further definition. A person who has no residence address cannot, of
course, report a residence address. For such situations, Sec.
72.6(c)(1) provides that ``if the sex offender has no present or
expected residence address,'' then the sex offender must provide
``other information describing where the sex offender resides or will
reside with whatever definiteness is possible under the
circumstances.''
(ix) With respect to Sec. 72.6(d) and (e), relating to information
about international travel and passports and immigration documents, the
comment proposed that the rule prohibit this information from becoming
part of the public record. The conditions for public disclosure by
registration jurisdictions of information about sex offenders,
including information about their international travel and their
passports and immigration documents, are outside the scope of this
rulemaking, which concerns the registration requirements for sex
offenders under SORNA. Disclosure of sex offender information is
addressed in statutes not implicated by this rulemaking and in the
SORNA Guidelines and SORNA Supplemental Guidelines, which do not
require inclusion of international travel, passport, and immigration
document information on the public sex offender websites. See 73 FR at
38059.
(x) With respect to Sec. 72.6(f), relating to vehicle information,
the comment asked for evidence that watercraft and aircraft have been
used in the commission of sexual offenses to justify the collection of
information about such vehicles. As the section-by-section analysis
below explains, vehicle information may be useful to help prevent
flight, facilitate investigation, or effect an apprehension if a sex
offender commits new offenses or violates registration requirements.
This rationale applies to watercraft and aircraft, as well as land
vehicles, whether or not the particular vehicles are used in committing
sex offenses.
(xi) The comment proposed to specify in Sec. 72.6(g), relating to
information about professional licenses, that professional licensing
shall not be denied based on conviction for a sexual offense unless it
has a relationship to the responsibilities of the job. SORNA imposes no
professional or occupational disqualifications on sex offenders, and
the matter is outside the scope of this rulemaking, which concerns the
registration requirements for sex offenders under SORNA. The Attorney
General has no authority to prohibit or restrict any professional or
occupational disqualifications for sex offenders that states may adopt.
(xii) The comment said that Sec. 72.6 should be revised because
SORNA does not require public disclosure of certain types of
information about sex offenders, mentioning specifically employer name,
information about tier I sex offenders (not convicted of a specified
offense against a minor), and non-sexual offenses. The requirements and
exceptions for public disclosure of information about sex offenders by
registration jurisdictions are outside the scope of this rulemaking,
which concerns the registration requirements for sex offenders under
SORNA, and they are not within the subject matter of Sec. 72.6, which
identifies types of information sex offenders must provide for
inclusion in the registries. Public disclosure of sex offender
information is separately addressed in statutes not germane to this
rulemaking and in the SORNA Guidelines and SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines, which do not require registration jurisdictions to include
on their public sex offender websites the types of information
referenced in this part of the comment. See 73 FR at 38059.
(xiii) The comment said that the regulations should require
accurate information (about sex offenders), provide penalties for
inaccurate information or for use of the information to harm the family
of the person required to register, and discourage third-party
dissemination of information. These matters are outside the scope of
this rulemaking, which concerns the registration requirements for sex
offenders under SORNA. SORNA independently directs registration
jurisdictions to ``include instructions on
[[Page 69863]]
how to seek correction of information that an individual contends is
erroneous'' on their public sex offender websites. 34 U.S.C. 20920(e).
It further directs that these websites ``shall include a warning that
information on the site should not be used to unlawfully injure,
harass, or commit a crime against any individual named in the registry
or residing or working at any reported address,'' and that ``[t]he
warning shall note that any such action could result in civil or
criminal penalties.'' Id. Sec. 20920(f).
(xiv) With respect to Sec. 72.7(b), regarding periodic in-person
verification of registration information, the comment proposed
providing an alternative to in-person verification in instances of
natural disasters. The in-person verification requirement is statutory,
see 34 U.S.C. 20918, and cannot be changed by rulemaking. However,
Sec. 72.8(a)(2) in this rule explains that noncompliance with SORNA's
requirements (including its in-person appearance requirements) may be
excused if compliance is prevented by circumstances beyond the sex
offender's control, circumstances that could include the exigencies
presented in natural disasters.
(xv) With respect to Sec. 72.8, regarding criminal liability under
18 U.S.C. 2250, the comment proposed (a) providing that the penalty for
state violations shall be governed by state law, (b) providing a
defense for individuals compliant with state law, and (c) providing a
defense for persons with out-of-state convictions who fail to register
through good-faith belief that registration is not required. These
proposed changes are in part legally incorrect and in part already
covered. Congress enacted SORNA's criminal provision to provide Federal
criminal penalties for both state and Federal sex offenders who violate
SORNA's requirements under circumstances supporting Federal
jurisdiction. See 18 U.S.C. 2250(a)-(b); 34 U.S.C. 20911(1), (5)-(8).
SORNA's requirements apply to both state and Federal sex offenders
regardless of whether they are paralleled in state law registration
requirements. See Willman, 972 F.3d at 821-24 and Sec. 72.3 in this
rule. As provided in Sec. 72.8(a)(1)(iii), sex offenders are not
subject to liability under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for violating registration
requirements of which they are unaware, a limitation that applies
regardless of whether their convictions are in-state or out-of-state.
(xvi) The comment proposed establishing that these regulations are
not intended to replace the legislative process. With respect to the
Federal legislative process, this rule interprets and implements
Congress's decisions in SORNA, see 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), and does not
supplant or replace them. Rather, the many comments proposing that this
rule abrogate SORNA's requirements seek the replacement of the Federal
legislative process with inconsistent rulemaking. The Attorney
General's actions in this rulemaking are not exercises of Federal
legislative power barred by the non-delegation doctrine, as explained
in the section-by-section analysis below. With respect to state
legislative processes, the Attorney General has no authority over what
state legislatures choose to do and cannot replace their processes by
rulemaking.
(xvii) The comment proposed providing that (state) judicial
precedents apply in the case of any rules that conflict with state
supreme court decisions. State judicial decisions finding state
registration laws to be in conflict with the state constitution do not
affect the validity of the corresponding requirements under SORNA.
However, SORNA allows such decisions to be taken into account in
determining whether states have substantially implemented SORNA's
requirements in their registration programs. See 34 U.S.C. 20927(b).
(xviii) The comment proposed clarification of the process for
classification of out-of-state offenders. The process by which states
classify out-of-state offenders is outside the scope of this
rulemaking, which concerns the registration requirements for sex
offenders under SORNA. The SORNA Guidelines provide guidance to the
states and other registration jurisdictions regarding the application
of SORNA's tiering criteria to all sex offenders, including out-of-
state offenders. See 73 FR at 38052-54.
(xix) The comment proposed discouraging the inclusion of non-
essential information in the public sex offender websites. The matter
is outside the scope of this rulemaking, which concerns the
registration requirements for sex offenders under SORNA. Other
provisions of SORNA and the SORNA Guidelines and SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines address the types of information that should or should not
be included on the public websites, or whose inclusion or exclusion is
within the discretion of the registration jurisdictions. See 34 U.S.C.
20920; 73 FR at 38058-61; 76 FR at 1636-37.
(xx) The comment proposed encouraging states to provide penalties
for vigilantism. All states already have criminal penalties for
unlawful violence against persons, including sex offenders, whether by
vigilantes or others, and the Department of Justice rejects and
condemns all unlawful violence against persons, including sex
offenders. SORNA's standards provide that public sex offender websites
``shall include a warning that information on the site should not be
used to unlawfully injure, harass, or commit a crime against any
individual named in the registry or residing or working at any reported
address'' and ``note that any such action could result in civil or
criminal penalties.'' 34 U.S.C. 20920(f).
(xxi) The comment proposed encouraging states to use risk
assessment and other proven methods for the identification, treatment,
and termination of low-risk offenders. The criteria for classification
of sex offenders and early termination of registration are statutory
and cannot be changed by rulemaking. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(2)-(4), 20915.
Assessment of sex offenders for purposes of treatment is outside the
scope of this rulemaking, which concerns the registration requirements
for sex offenders under SORNA.
(xxii) The comment proposed discouraging states from utilizing
residency restrictions or other proximity restrictions. SORNA does not
prescribe or encourage residency or other proximity restrictions, and
the matter is outside the scope of this rulemaking, which concerns the
registration requirements for sex offenders under SORNA.
(xxiii) The comment proposed discouraging states from lifetime
registration for all, and instead recommending adoption of SORNA's
tiered registration periods as provided in Sec. 72.5. SORNA's
requirements generally constitute a floor rather than a ceiling for
state registration programs. See 73 FR at 38032-35, 38046. Whether
registration jurisdictions choose to adopt more stringent registration
requirements than SORNA's minimum national standards, including longer
registration periods, is a matter within their discretion. See id.
Recommending that states go no further than SORNA's requirements is not
necessary for the purposes of this rulemaking, which articulates the
registration requirements for sex offenders under SORNA, and the
comment was not persuasive that the rule should incorporate such a
recommendation. In responding to public comments of a similar nature,
the SORNA Guidelines noted that ``many jurisdictions have adopted
durational requirements for registration that . . . may . . . exceed
the . . . SORNA minimum . . . such as making lifetime registration the
norm in relation to registrants generally.'' 73 FR at 38034.
Consequently, ``taking the SORNA standards as a ceiling . . . would
require many jurisdictions to reduce or
[[Page 69864]]
eliminate requirements that they were free to adopt . . . and currently
apply,'' which ``is not plausibly the objective of a law (SORNA)
enacted with the general purpose of strengthening sex offender
registration and notification in the United States.'' Id.
(xxiv) The comment proposed providing that International Megan's
Law, residency restrictions, and other regulatory measures only apply
for the duration of registration. International Megan's Law added the
international travel reporting requirements of SORNA and related
authorities, appearing in 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7), (c) and implemented by
Sec. Sec. 72.6(d), 72.7(f) of this rule. In common with the other
requirements under SORNA appearing in this rule, those requirements
continue to apply until the end of the SORNA registration period.
Whether registration jurisdictions choose to impose such requirements
for longer periods than the registration periods prescribed by SORNA is
within their discretion. See 73 FR at 38046. Residency restrictions,
where they exist, are based on the laws of the jurisdictions that
choose to adopt them. SORNA does not require such restrictions, the
Attorney General has no authority to specify their duration, and they
are outside the scope of this rulemaking.
A Comment Proposing Five Changes in the Rule
Another comment proposed five changes in the rule:
(i) The comment stated that the Attorney General should disclose
all ``ex parte contacts'' with United States Attorneys because, the
comment asserted, some parts of the rule (such as Sec. 72.3) appear to
be targeting common defenses raised by sex offenders accused of failing
to register and hence may be the product of litigation strategy rather
than reasoned rulemaking. The comment reflects a false opposition
between addressing issues that have arisen in litigation and reasoned
rulemaking. This rulemaking carries out a statutory directive to the
Attorney General to issue regulations to interpret and implement SORNA,
see 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), in furtherance of SORNA's objective of
protecting the public from sex offenders by establishing a
comprehensive national system for their registration, see id. 20901. In
carrying out this responsibility, the Attorney General reasonably
resolves issues and problems that have arisen in SORNA implementation,
including those arising in the enforcement of SORNA by means of the
criminal provision Congress has enacted for that purpose, 18 U.S.C.
2250.
(ii) The comment said that the rule, for fair notice reasons,
should specify that other uncodified legislative rules imposing
registration duties on sex offenders under SORNA are abrogated. The
comment did not identify ``legislative rules'' outside of these
regulations that it was referring to or provide a persuasive reason for
declaring that such rules are abrogated. This rule encompasses all
current regulations issued by the Attorney General under SORNA. The
other SORNA-related final documents the Attorney General has published
in the Federal Register, listed in the ``rulemaking history'' section
above, are guidelines that provide guidance and assistance to
registration jurisdictions in implementing SORNA. Section
72.8(a)(1)(iii) in this rule moots fair notice concerns by explaining
that sex offenders are not held liable under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for
violating registration requirements of which they are unaware.
(iii) The comment said that the Attorney General, for Tenth
Amendment and fair notice reasons, should specify that states are
permitted to impose less stringent registration requirements than
SORNA's standards and that registrants fully comply with SORNA by
complying with state registration laws even if the state has not
implemented SORNA. However, this rule articulates SORNA's registration
requirements for sex offenders; it does not compel states to do
anything. States are afforded a funding incentive to substantially
implement SORNA's requirements in their registration programs, a
statutory condition that cannot be abrogated by rulemaking. See 34
U.S.C. 20927. Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in this rule moots fair notice
concerns by explaining that sex offenders are not held liable under 18
U.S.C. 2250 for violating requirements of which they are unaware, and
Sec. 72.8(a)(2) further explains that noncompliance with SORNA may be
excused where compliance was prevented by a state's failure to carry
out a necessary complementary role. The notion that sex offenders need
only comply with SORNA's registration requirements where state law
imposes the same requirements is incorrect as a matter of law. See
Willman, 972 F.3d at 821-24.
(iv) Section 72.5(b) in the rule states that the registration
period of a sex offender sentenced to imprisonment begins to run when
he is released from custody. The comment asserted to the contrary that
a sex offender's registration period begins to run when the registrant
is convicted, for three reasons. First, the comment argued that there
is no reason to suspend the running of the registration period during
the sex offender's initial confinement. This argument is question-
begging because it assumes that the registration period is already
running before the sex offender is released. Second, the comment
asserted that Sec. 72.5(b)'s interpretation of SORNA is implausible
because it would mean that a sex offender must initially register
before the registration period has begun, given the requirement of 34
U.S.C. 20913(b)(1) that a sex offender initially register before
completing his sentence of imprisonment. However, SORNA logically
requires that a sex offender be advised of his registration obligations
and initially registered shortly before his release from custody, see
34 U.S.C. 20919(a), because that is the point at which he is about to
be released into the community and the post-release tracking and
notification functions of sex offender registration are initially
implicated. See 73 FR at 38062-63. Third, the comment asserted that
running the registration period from conviction provides a readily
ascertainable starting date and is consistent with Congress's decision
to base sex offenders' registration duties on the crimes for which they
have been convicted. Running the registration period from release
likewise provides a definite starting point that is consistent with
SORNA's tiering criteria for sex offenders and the associated
registration periods. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(2)-(4), 20915. The section-
by-section analysis below provides further explanation regarding the
commencement of sex offenders' registration periods under SORNA and why
the starting point is release from custody for an imprisoned offender.
(v) The comment argued that Sec. 72.7(f) violates a constitutional
right to travel by requiring sex offenders to report intended
international travel at least 21 days in advance because, the comment
asserted, it makes registrants liable for felony convictions every time
they travel without providing 21 days' notice. It further asserted that
Congress's failure to incorporate the 21-day notice requirement into
International Megan's Law evinces a congressional judgment that the
requirement is unnecessary and unduly burdensome, and that advance
notice of less than 21 days may afford Federal authorities adequate
time to notify destination countries. However, the Attorney General
initially adopted the 21-day advance notice requirement in the SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines, reflecting the judgment of
[[Page 69865]]
the responsible Federal agencies concerning the time needed for
effective notification regarding international travel by sex offenders,
but recognizing that exceptions to that requirement may be necessary
and appropriate in certain circumstances. See 76 FR at 1637-38. This
rule follows the same approach, generally requiring 21-day advance
notice, but allowing later notice when a sex offender does not
anticipate a trip abroad that far in advance. See Sec. Sec. 72.6(d),
72.7(f), 72.8(a)(2) Ex. 3, and the accompanying discussion in the
section-by-section analysis below. The analysis explains that ``[t]he
21-day advance notice requirement is designed to provide relevant
agencies . . . sufficient lead time for any investigation or inquiry
that may be warranted relating to the sex offender's international
travel, and for notification of U.S. and foreign authorities in
destination countries, prior to the sex offender's arrival in a
destination country.'' In SORNA, as amended by International Megan's
Law, Congress empowered the Attorney General to prescribe ``time and
manner requirements'' in conformity with which sex offenders must
``provide and update information . . . relating to intended travel
outside the United States,'' 34 U.S.C. 20914(c), which Congress would
not logically have done if it deemed unnecessary and unduly burdensome
the 21-day advance notice requirement that the Attorney General had
already adopted in the SORNA Supplemental Guidelines. The comment
provided no persuasive reason to believe that any constitutional right
is violated by these aspects of the rule, which are within the scope of
the express authority Congress has given the Attorney General to
prescribe timing requirements for reporting international travel.
A Comment Alleging Four Inconsistencies With SORNA
A comment argued that this rule is inconsistent with SORNA in four
respects.
(i) The comment claimed that Sec. 72.3, providing in part that sex
offenders must comply with SORNA's requirements regardless of whether a
jurisdiction has substantially implemented those requirements, is
inconsistent with SORNA because Congress did not intend to punish sex
offenders for jurisdictions' failures to implement SORNA. However,
Sec. 72.3 accurately states the law. See Willman, 972 F.3d at 821-24.
Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) explains that sex offenders are not held liable
for violating requirements under SORNA of which they are unaware, and
Sec. 72.8(a)(2) explains that failure to comply with SORNA's
requirements may be excused where compliance is prevented by a
jurisdiction's failure to carry out a necessary complementary role.
There is accordingly no punishment of sex offenders based on
jurisdictions' shortcomings.
(ii) The comment claimed that Sec. Sec. 72.7(d) and 72.6(c), in
requiring departure-notification by sex offenders in certain
circumstances, conflict with 34 U.S.C. 20913(c), as interpreted by the
Supreme Court in Nichols, 136 S. Ct. at 1117-19. However, as the
section-by-section analysis below explains, the departure-notification
provisions of the rule are premised on powers of the Attorney General
under other provisions of SORNA and are consistent with Nichols.
(iii) The comment claimed that Sec. 72.7(c) is inconsistent with
SORNA in requiring that a sex offender must report changes in
residence, employment, and school attendance in the jurisdictions in
which they occur, because 34 U.S.C. 20913(c) only requires that a sex
offender appear in person and report the change ``in at least 1
jurisdiction involved'' without further specification. However, the
section-by-section analysis below explains that the specification of
the relevant jurisdiction is within the Attorney General's authority
under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b) and 34 U.S.C. 20914(c) to interpret and
implement SORNA and to prescribe the manner in which sex offenders must
provide and update information required by SORNA. The analysis also
explains the justification for this specification based on the purposes
of SORNA's in-person appearance requirements.
(iv) The comment proposed amending Sec. 72.7(e) and (f), which
require sex offenders to report to the residence jurisdiction
information relating to remote communication identifiers, temporary
lodging, vehicles, and international travel. Specifically, the comment
said that sex offenders should be permitted to report such changes to
any ``involved jurisdiction,'' as referenced in 34 U.S.C. 20913(c). In
support of the proposed amendment, the comment argued that, for
example, it could be nearly impossible for an offender who works long
hours at a job in State A, but lives in State B, to report the required
information in State B during normal business hours without having to
miss work. However, Sec. 72.7(e) and (f) do not require the reporting
of information through in-person appearances, but rather allow
reporting by whatever means the jurisdiction allows, such as an email
or phone call.
Other Comments
Other comments proposed additional changes to this rule, beyond
those discussed above, but did not provide persuasive reasons for such
changes. The proposals put forward by one or more commenters included
the following:
A comment proposed that Sec. 72.6(c)(2)'s requirement that a sex
offender report temporary lodging when away from his residence for
seven or more days should be changed to require such reporting only
when the sex offender is away from his residence for 14 or more days.
The reasons given by the comment were that vacation time is generally
two weeks and, for families on opposite coasts, it is impossible to
drive across the country, visit, and drive back within seven days.
However, Sec. 72.6(c)(2) does not prohibit sex offenders from
traveling away from their residences for any amount of time. It just
requires them to report to the residence jurisdiction within three
business days lodging away from their residences for seven or more
days. See Sec. 72.7(e).
A comment objected to the requirement of Sec. 72.6(f) that sex
offenders provide information as to where any vehicle owned or operated
by the sex offender is habitually parked, docked, or otherwise kept, on
the ground that innocent people should not get dragged onto the
registry because they allow a registered sex offender to visit.
However, the referenced provision in Sec. 72.6(f) does not require sex
offenders to report the identities or addresses of people they visit.
It just requires reporting where they habitually keep their vehicles.
As the section-by-section analysis below explains, this information may
be useful to help prevent flight, facilitate investigation, or effect
an apprehension if a sex offender commits new offenses or violates
registration requirements.
A comment objected that the rule would burden sex offenders who
telework or telelearn with employers or schools in remote jurisdictions
by requiring them to travel to those jurisdictions to register or
report changes. However, Sec. 72.4 in the rule requires a sex offender
to register and keep the registration current in each jurisdiction in
which the offender resides, is an employee, or is a student, and Sec.
72.7(c) requires a sex offender to report a change in residence,
employment, or school attendance through in-person appearance in the
relevant jurisdiction. These provisions implement statutory
requirements
[[Page 69866]]
appearing in 34 U.S.C. 20913(a), (c). They do not expand the range of
jurisdictions in which sex offenders are required to register or report
changes beyond those identified in the statute. In particular,
Sec. Sec. 72.4 and 72.7(c) do not require a sex offender to register
or appear in a jurisdiction in which he has a telework or telelearning
connection but no physical presence. See 73 FR at 38062. Nor do they
require a sex offender to register in a jurisdiction in which he has
some work-related presence but in which he does not regularly work or
have a fixed place of employment. See id.
A comment requested clarification regarding (i) the state offenses
for which SORNA requires registration and (ii) whether SORNA requires
sex offenders to register in states whose own laws do not require
registration by those offenders. Regarding the first question, SORNA
identifies the types of offenses, including state offenses, for which
it requires registration, see 34 U.S.C. 20911(1), (5)-(8), and the
SORNA Guidelines provide further explanation, see 73 FR at 38050-52. If
a sex offender does not know that he is required to register because he
is unaware that the offense for which he was convicted gave rise to a
duty to register, then he is not held liable under 18 U.S.C. 2250,
which only penalizes violations of known registration obligations, as
explained in Sec. 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in this rule. Regarding the second
question, SORNA's registration requirements are independent of state
law registration requirements, see Willman, 972 F.3d at 821-24, but a
sex offender's noncompliance with SORNA may be excused where compliance
is prevented by a state's failure to carry out a necessary
complementary role, as explained in Sec. 72.8(a)(2) in this rule.
A comment proposed that the rule clarify Federal prosecutorial
priorities with respect to SORNA violations in jurisdictions that have
not implemented SORNA, suggesting that Federal prosecution be limited
or forgone where the jurisdiction's laws do not impose the same
requirements. However, as Sec. 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in this rule explains,
sex offenders are not held liable under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for violation of
registration requirements of which they are unaware, and, as Sec.
72.8(a)(2) explains, noncompliance with SORNA may be excused where
compliance is prevented by circumstances beyond their control, such as
a jurisdiction's failure to carry out a necessary complementary role.
The comment was not persuasive that the Department of Justice should
adopt a policy of not prosecuting sex offenders for violating known
registration obligations under SORNA, where nothing prevented those
offenders from complying, just because the registration jurisdiction
had not implemented some aspects of SORNA in its registration program.
Federal prosecutorial priorities are usually not established by
regulation, and addressing prosecutorial priorities is not necessary
for purposes of this rulemaking, which articulates sex offenders'
registration requirements under SORNA.
A comment asserted that Sec. 72.3's application of SORNA's
requirements to all sex offenders, regardless of when they were
convicted, may violate due process because, at the state level, courts
may determine whether particular sex offenders are required to
register. Section 72.3 addresses the general scope of SORNA's
application, not whether particular sex offenders are required to
register under state law, and raises no due process issue.
A comment proposed adding to Sec. 72.5 a provision requiring that
a sex offender be removed from the sex offender registry if he receives
a pardon, and that the offense be expunged from all court and law
enforcement records. However, only pardons on the ground of innocence
terminate registration obligations under SORNA, see 73 FR at 38050, and
the Attorney General has no authority to require registration
jurisdictions to expunge the records of sex offenders who are pardoned
in those jurisdictions.
A comment asserted that Sec. 72.6(g), which requires sex offenders
to report professional licenses, is vague and not required by SORNA.
Section 72.6 is sufficiently definite, requiring sex offenders to
provide information concerning licensing that authorizes them to engage
in an occupation or carry out a trade or business. Adopting this
requirement is an exercise of the Attorney General's authority under 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(8) to require sex offenders to provide other
information, beyond that expressly described in the statute. The
section-by-section analysis below explains that information concerning
professional licenses may be helpful in locating a registered sex
offender if he absconds, may provide a basis for notifying the
responsible licensing authority if the offender's conviction of a sex
offense may affect his eligibility for the license, and may be useful
in crosschecking the accuracy and completeness of other information the
offender is required to provide, e.g., if the sex offender is licensed
to engage in a certain occupation but does not provide name and address
information for a place of employment as required by 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(4).
A comment proposed generally replacing SORNA's in-person reporting
requirements with reporting through remote communication technology.
SORNA's requirements to report or verify certain information through
in-person appearances are statutory and cannot be abrogated by
rulemaking. See 34 U.S.C. 20913(c), 20918.
A comment proposed expanding the language in the rule about
circumstances that may excuse noncompliance with SORNA's requirements
to include public health emergencies and natural disasters. However,
Sec. 72.8(a)(2) in the rule makes clear that any uncontrollable
circumstances preventing compliance with SORNA, regardless of their
character, may excuse noncompliance under the conditions stated in 18
U.S.C. 2250(c).
A comment proposed encouraging registration jurisdictions to
conform their registration regulations to SORNA to achieve uniformity
across jurisdictions. Jurisdictions are encouraged to conform their
registration requirements to SORNA's minimum national standards by the
funding incentive of 34 U.S.C. 20927 and the extensive guidance and
assistance that the Department of Justice provides to SORNA
implementation through the SMART Office. See 76 FR at 1638. As Sec.
72.1 in this rule notes, the adoption of more extensive or stringent
requirements is within the discretion of the registration
jurisdictions. The matter is explained in the section-by-section
analysis below and in the SORNA Guidelines, see 73 FR at 38032-35,
38046. Making recommendations regarding jurisdictions' adoption of
measures not required by SORNA is outside the scope of this rulemaking,
which articulates SORNA's registration requirements for sex offenders.
Section-by-Section Analysis
The present rule expands part 72 of title 28 of the Code of Federal
Regulations to provide a full statement of the registration
requirements for sex offenders under SORNA. It revises the statement of
purpose and definitional sections in 28 CFR 72.1 and 72.2. It maintains
the existing provision in 28 CFR 72.3 stating that SORNA's requirements
apply to all sex offenders, regardless of when they were convicted, and
incorporates additional language in Sec. 72.3 to reinforce that point.
It also adds to part 72 provisions--Sec. Sec. 72.4 through 72.8--
articulating where sex offenders must register, how long they must
register, what information they must provide, how they must register
and keep their registrations current to
[[Page 69867]]
satisfy SORNA's requirements, and the liability they face for
violations, following SORNA's express requirements and the prior
articulation of standards for these matters in the SORNA Guidelines and
the SORNA Supplemental Guidelines.
Section 72.1--Purpose
Section 72.1(a) states part 72's purpose to specify SORNA's
registration requirements and their scope of application. It further
notes that the Attorney General has the authority pursuant to
provisions of SORNA to specify these requirements and their
applicability as provided in part 72.
Section 72.1(b) states that part 72 does not preempt or limit any
obligations of or requirements relating to sex offenders under other
laws, rules, or policies. It further notes that states and other
governmental entities may prescribe requirements, with which sex
offenders must comply, that are more extensive or stringent than those
prescribed by SORNA. This reflects the fact that SORNA provides minimum
national standards for sex offender registration. It is intended to
establish a floor rather than a ceiling for the registration programs
of states and other jurisdictions, which can prescribe registration
requirements binding on sex offenders under their own laws independent
of SORNA. Jurisdictions accordingly are free to adopt more stringent or
extensive registration requirements for sex offenders than those set
forth in this part, including more stringent or extensive requirements
regarding where, when, and how long sex offenders must register, what
information they must provide, and what they must do to keep their
registrations current. See 73 FR at 38032-35, 38046.
Section 72.2--Definitions
Section 72.2 states that terms used in part 72 have the same
meaning as in SORNA. Hence, for example, references in the part to
registration ``jurisdictions'' mean the 50 states, the District of
Columbia, the five principal U.S. territories, and Indian tribes
qualifying under 34 U.S.C. 20929. See id. 20911(10); 73 FR at 38045,
38048. Likewise, where the part uses such terms as sex offender (and
tiers thereof), sex offense, convicted or conviction, sex offender
registry, student, employee or employment, and reside or residence, the
meaning is the same as in SORNA. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(1)-(9), (11)-(13);
73 FR at 38050-57, 38061-62.
Section 72.3--Applicability of the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act
Section 72.3 carries forward in substance current 28 CFR 72.3,
which states that SORNA's requirements apply to all sex offenders,
including those whose sex offense convictions predate SORNA's
enactment. This section was initially adopted on February 28, 2007, and
amended on December 29, 2010. The section and its rationale are
explained further in the interim and final rulemakings that adopted it.
See 72 FR 8894; 75 FR 81849.
Section 72.3, and its modification by this rulemaking, are
constitutionally sound. In Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84 (2003), the
Supreme Court upheld the retroactive application of sex offender
registration requirements against an ex post facto challenge, in
reviewing a state registration system whose major features paralleled
SORNA's in many ways. The commonalities between SORNA and the state
registration program upheld in Smith include required registration
before release from imprisonment; provision of name, address,
employment, vehicle, and other registration information; continued
registration and periodic verification of registration information for
at least 15 years; lifetime registration and quarterly verification for
certain registrants convicted of aggravated or multiple sex offenses;
and public internet posting of information about registrants. See id.
at 90-91. The Federal courts have consistently rejected ex post facto
challenges to SORNA itself. See, e.g., United States v. Felts, 674 F.3d
599, 605-06 (6th Cir. 2012).
Section 72.3 also is not premised on any constitutionally
impermissible delegation of legislative authority to the executive
branch of government. Congress intended that SORNA apply to all sex
offenders, regardless of when they were convicted. See Reynolds, 565
U.S. at 442-45; id. at 448-49 & n. (Scalia, J., dissenting) (agreeing
that Congress intended for SORNA to apply to all sex offenders).
Congress authorized the Attorney General to specify the applicability
of SORNA's requirements to sex offenders with pre-SORNA and pre-SORNA-
implementation convictions, see 34 U.S.C. 20913(d), in order to
effectuate that intent while enabling the Attorney General to address
transitional issues presented in integrating the existing sex offender
population into SORNA's comprehensive nationwide registration system.
See Reynolds, 565 U.S. at 440-42; 72 FR at 8895-97; 73 FR at 38035-36,
38046, 38063-64; 75 FR at 81850-52. In adopting Sec. 72.3, the
Attorney General implemented the relevant legislative policy--that
SORNA's requirements should apply to all sex offenders--to the maximum,
having found no reason to delay or qualify its implementation.
Consequently, as an articulation of a legislative policy embodied in
SORNA, the issuance of Sec. 72.3 pursuant to 34 U.S.C. 20913(d)
involved no exercise of legislative authority and did not contravene
the non-delegation doctrine. See Gundy, 139 S. Ct. at 2123-30
(plurality opinion); id. at 2130-31 (Alito, J., concurring in the
judgment); id., Brief for the United States at 22-38.
Moreover, regardless of any question concerning the validity of 34
U.S.C. 20913(d), Sec. 72.3 is adequately supported on the basis of the
Attorney General's authority to issue guidelines and regulations to
interpret and implement SORNA, appearing in 34 U.S.C. 20912(b). In
Sec. 72.3, the Attorney General interpreted SORNA as intended by
Congress to apply to all sex offenders regardless of when they were
convicted--an interpretation endorsed by the Supreme Court, see
Reynolds, 565 U.S. at 440-45; see also Gundy, 139 S. Ct. at 2123-31--
and he implemented that legislative policy by embodying it in a clearly
stated rule.
The same considerations apply to the amended version of Sec. 72.3
adopted here, which effectuates more reliably the legislative policy
judgment that SORNA's requirements should apply to all sex offenders by
restating the current rule with additional specificity, but which
involves no change in substance. In comparison with the current
formulation of Sec. 72.3, this rule adds a second sentence stating
that (i) all sex offenders must comply with all requirements of SORNA,
regardless of when they were convicted; (ii) this is so regardless of
whether a registration jurisdiction has substantially implemented SORNA
or any particular SORNA requirement; and (iii) this is so regardless of
whether a particular requirement or class of sex offenders is mentioned
in examples in the rules or guidelines issued by the Attorney General.
The first part of the added sentence reiterates Sec. 72.3's
specification of SORNA's applicability to all sex offenders in the form
of an affirmative direction to sex offenders, and it states explicitly
that all of SORNA's requirements so apply.
The added sentence further states that the registration duties
SORNA prescribes for sex offenders are not conditional on registration
jurisdictions' having adopted SORNA's requirements
[[Page 69868]]
in their own registration laws or policies. For example, SORNA requires
sex offenders to register in the states (and other registration
jurisdictions) in which they reside, work, or attend school. See 34
U.S.C. 20913(a). All of the states have sex offender registration
programs, which were initially established long before the enactment of
SORNA. Hence, sex offenders are able to register in these existing
state programs. The fact that a particular state has not modified its
registration program at this time to incorporate the full range of
SORNA requirements does not prevent a sex offender required to register
by SORNA from registering in the state or excuse a failure to do so.
See, e.g., Felts, 674 F.3d at 603-05.
The same principle applies in situations in which a jurisdiction's
law does not track or incorporate a particular SORNA requirement
affecting a sex offender. Consider a situation of this nature in which
SORNA requires a sex offender to register but the law of the state in
which he resides does not. This may occur, for example, because state
law does not require registration based on the particular sex offense
for which the offender was convicted, or because state law requires
registration by sex offenders for shorter periods of time than SORNA,
or because state law does not apply its registration requirements
``retroactively'' as broadly as Sec. 72.3 applies SORNA's requirements
to sex offenders with pre-SORNA convictions. Notwithstanding the
absence of a parallel state law, the registration authorities in the
state may be willing to register the sex offender because Federal law
(i.e., SORNA) requires him to register. Cf. Doe v. Keathley, 290 S.W.3d
719 (Mo. 2009) (state constitutional prohibition of retrospective laws
does not preclude registration based on SORNA). If the state
registration authorities are willing to register the sex offender, he
is not relieved of the duty to register merely because state law does
not track the Federal law registration requirement.
Hence, sex offenders can be held liable for violating any
requirement stated in this rule, regardless of when they were
convicted, and regardless of whether the jurisdiction in which the
violation occurs has adopted the requirement in its own law. This does
not mean, however, that SORNA unfairly holds sex offenders liable for
failing to comply with its requirements, where the requirement is
unknown to the sex offender or impossible for him to carry out. Cf.
Felts, 674 F.3d at 605 (noting concern). Federal enforcement of SORNA's
requirements occurs primarily through SORNA's criminal provision, 18
U.S.C. 2250. That provision makes it a Federal crime for a person
required to register by SORNA to knowingly fail to register or update a
registration as required by SORNA under circumstances supporting
Federal jurisdiction, such as conviction of a Federal sex offense or
interstate or foreign travel. As discussed below, section 2250 holds
sex offenders liable only for violations of known registration
obligations, and it excuses failures to comply with SORNA under certain
conditions if the noncompliance results from circumstances beyond the
sex offenders' control.
Consider first the concern that sex offenders may lack notice
regarding registration obligations. Under the procedures prescribed by
SORNA, and under standard procedures that have generally been adopted
by registration jurisdictions whether or not they have implemented
SORNA's requirements, the registration of sex offenders normally
involves (i) informing sex offenders of their registration duties, (ii)
obtaining from sex offenders signed acknowledgments confirming receipt
of that information, and (iii) having sex offenders provide the
required registration information. See 34 U.S.C. 20919(a); 73 FR at
38062-63.
Registration procedures of this nature inform sex offenders of what
they must do, and the acknowledgments obtained from them provide
evidence that they were so informed. See 76 FR at 1638. If a
jurisdiction that registers a sex offender has not fully revised its
processes for conformity to SORNA, then it may not tell the sex
offender about some of the registration requirements imposed by SORNA,
such as those that the jurisdiction has not incorporated in its own
laws. If the jurisdiction fails to inform a sex offender about some of
SORNA's registration requirements, the sex offender then does not know
about some of his registration obligations under SORNA based on the
information received from the jurisdiction, and may not learn of them
from other sources. In such cases, the possibility of liability under
18 U.S.C. 2250 continues to be limited to cases in which a sex offender
``knowingly fails to register or update a registration as required by
[SORNA].'' The limitation to ``knowing[ ]'' violations provides a
safeguard against liability based on unwitting violations of SORNA
requirements of which a sex offender was not aware. Section
72.8(a)(1)(iii) of this rule, and the accompanying discussion below,
provide further explanation about the limitation of liability under 18
U.S.C. 2250 to cases involving violation of known registration
obligations.
The second concern about fairness involves situations in which a
sex offender has failed to do something SORNA requires because it is
impossible for him to do so. For example, as noted above, a
jurisdiction with laws that do not require registration based on the
particular offense for which a sex offender was convicted may
nevertheless be willing to register him in light of his Federal law
(SORNA) registration obligation. But alternatively, the jurisdiction's
law or practice may constrain its registration personnel to register
only sex offenders whom its own laws require to register. In such a
case, it is impossible for the sex offender to register in that
jurisdiction, though subject to a registration duty under SORNA. This
is so because registration is by its nature a two-party transaction,
involving a sex offender's providing information about where he resides
and other matters as required, and acceptance of that information by
the jurisdiction for inclusion in the sex offender registry. If the
jurisdiction is unwilling to carry out its side of the transaction,
then the sex offender cannot register.
Concerns of this nature are also addressed in SORNA's criminal
provision, 18 U.S.C. 2250. Subsection (c) of section 2250 provides an
affirmative defense to liability for SORNA violations if ``(1)
uncontrollable circumstances prevented the individual from complying;
(2) the individual did not contribute to the creation of such
circumstances in reckless disregard of the requirement to comply; and
(3) the individual complied as soon as such circumstances ceased to
exist.'' A registration jurisdiction's law or practice that precludes
registration of a sex offender, as described above, is a circumstance
that the sex offender cannot control and to which he did not
contribute, so he cannot be held liable for failure to register with
that jurisdiction as SORNA requires.
The defense in section 2250(c) comes with the proviso that the
defendant must comply with SORNA ``as soon as [the preventing]
circumstances cease[ ] to exist.'' For example, consider the case posed
above of a jurisdiction that refuses to register sex offenders based on
a particular offense for which SORNA requires registration, so that a
sex offender residing in the jurisdiction who was convicted of that
offense cannot register there. Suppose that the jurisdiction later
progresses in its implementation of SORNA and becomes willing to
register offenders who have been convicted for that sex offense. In
[[Page 69869]]
light of the proviso, the sex offender's obligation to register revives
once the jurisdiction becomes willing to register him. That is fair,
because the circumstance preventing his compliance with the SORNA
registration requirement no longer exists.
Section 72.8(a)(2) of this rule, and the accompanying discussion
below, provide further explanation about the contours of the
impossibility defense under 18 U.S.C. 2250(c).
Returning to the text of Sec. 72.3, the added sentence states at
the end that sex offenders must comply with SORNA's requirements
``regardless of whether any particular requirement or class of sex
offenders is mentioned in examples in this regulation or in other
regulations or guidelines issued by the Attorney General.'' In
conjunction with the earlier statement in the provision that all sex
offenders must comply with all SORNA requirements, the added language
responds to a judicial decision that did not give full effect to the
current regulation.
Section 72.3, as currently formulated, states that SORNA's
``requirements . . . apply to all sex offenders,'' exercising the
Attorney General's ``authority to specify the applicability of the
requirements of [SORNA] to sex offenders convicted before the enactment
of [SORNA] or its implementation in a particular jurisdiction.'' 34
U.S.C. 20913(d); see Reynolds, 565 U.S. at 441-45 (explaining
Congress's decision to give the Attorney General authority to apply
SORNA's requirements to sex offenders with pre-SORNA convictions).
Nevertheless, in United States v. DeJarnette, 741 F.3d 971 (9th Cir.
2013), the court believed that the Attorney General had not made all of
SORNA's requirements applicable to all sex offenders. The case
concerned the applicability of SORNA's requirement that a sex offender
register initially in the jurisdiction in which he is convicted, if it
differs from his residence jurisdiction, see 34 U.S.C. 20913(a) (second
sentence), where the sex offender's conviction predated SORNA's
enactment. Notwithstanding 28 CFR 72.3, the court concluded that the
Attorney General had not made this SORNA requirement applicable to sex
offenders with pre-SORNA convictions, if they were already subject to
state law registration requirements. DeJarnette, 741 F.3d at 982. The
decision was largely premised on the fact that the particular SORNA
requirement at issue was not mentioned in relation to that particular
class of sex offenders in the examples of sex offenders subject to
SORNA's requirements in 28 CFR 72.3 and the SORNA Guidelines.
DeJarnette, 741 F.3d at 976-80.
The sentence added to Sec. 72.3 by this rulemaking will foreclose
future decisions of this nature and ensure that Sec. 72.3's
application of SORNA's requirements to all sex offenders is given
effect consistently.
The rule includes one further change in Sec. 72.3, affecting the
first example in the provision. The example as currently formulated
describes a sex offender convicted in 1990 and released following
imprisonment in 2007, and says that the sex offender is subject to
SORNA's requirements. In Reynolds, the Supreme Court held that SORNA's
requirements did not apply to sex offenders with pre-SORNA convictions
prior to the Attorney General's exercise of the authority under 34
U.S.C. 20913(d) to specify SORNA's applicability to those offenders.
565 U.S. at 434-35. It follows that SORNA's requirements did not apply
to such sex offenders before the Attorney General's original issuance
of 28 CFR 72.3 on February 28, 2007. Example 1 in Sec. 72.3 might be
misunderstood as suggesting the contrary, i.e., that a sex offender
with a pre-SORNA conviction released from imprisonment at any time in
2007 was immediately subject to SORNA's requirements. Hence, to avoid
any possible inconsistency or apparent inconsistency with the Supreme
Court's decision in Reynolds, the rule changes the example by
substituting a later year for 2007.
Section 72.4--Where Sex Offenders Must Register
Section 72.4 tracks SORNA's express requirement that a sex offender
must register and keep the registration current in each jurisdiction in
which the sex offender resides, is an employee, or is a student, and
must also initially register in the jurisdiction in which the offender
was convicted if that jurisdiction differs from the jurisdiction of
residence. See 34 U.S.C. 20913(a); 73 FR at 38061-62.
Section 72.5--How Long Sex Offenders Must Register
Section 72.5 sets out SORNA's requirements regarding the duration
of registration. SORNA classifies sex offenders into three ``tiers,''
based on the nature and seriousness of their sex offenses and their
histories of recidivism. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(2)-(4); 73 FR at 38052-54.
The tier in which a sex offender falls affects how long the offender
must continue to register under SORNA. The required registration
periods are generally 15 years for a tier I sex offender, 25 years for
a tier II sex offender, and life for a tier III sex offender. See 34
U.S.C. 20915(a); 73 FR at 38068. Paragraph (a) in Sec. 72.5 reproduces
these requirements.
Paragraph (a) of Sec. 72.5 provides an exception ``when the sex
offender is in custody or civilly committed,'' incorporating in
substance an express proviso appearing in SORNA, 34 U.S.C. 20915(a).
The exception and proviso mean that SORNA does not require a sex
offender to carry out its processes for registering or updating
registrations during subsequent periods of confinement, e.g., when
imprisoned because of conviction for some other offense following his
release from imprisonment for the sex offense. This reflects that ``the
SORNA procedures for keeping up the registration . . . generally
presuppose the case of a sex offender who is free in the community''
and that ``[w]here a sex offender is confined, the public is protected
against the risk of his reoffending in a more direct way, and more
certain means are available for tracking his whereabouts.'' 73 FR at
38068. However, registration jurisdictions may see incremental value in
requiring sex offenders to carry out their processes for registering
and updating registrations during subsequent confinement and are free
to do so, though SORNA does not require it.
The proviso relating to custody or civil commitment does not
pertain to or limit SORNA's requirement that initial registration is to
occur while the sex offender is still imprisoned following conviction
for the predicate sex offense. See 34 U.S.C. 20913(b)(1), 20919(a).
Rather, as indicated above, it affects a sex offender's registration
obligations under SORNA if he is later reincarcerated after his
release. The proviso relating to custody or civil commitment also does
not mean that the running of the SORNA registration period is suspended
during such subsequent confinement, and does not otherwise affect the
commencement or duration of a sex offender's registration period under
SORNA.
For example, consider a sex offender, released in 2010 from
imprisonment for a sex offense conviction, whom SORNA requires to
register for 25 years as a tier II sex offender, and suppose the sex
offender is subsequently convicted during the registration period for
committing a robbery and imprisoned for three years for the latter
offense. SORNA's registration requirement for that sex offender
terminates in 2035, although he was incarcerated for three years of the
25-year SORNA registration period. Sex offenders should keep in mind,
however, that their registration jurisdictions are free to impose more
[[Page 69870]]
extensive requirements than SORNA, including longer registration
periods. Hence, the basic registration period under the law of a
jurisdiction in which such a sex offender is registered may be longer
than 25 years. And even if the basic registration period under the
jurisdiction's law is the same as the 25 years required by SORNA, the
jurisdiction may choose not to credit the three years the sex offender
spent in prison for the robbery towards the running of the registration
period under state law. See 73 FR at 38032-35, 38046, 38068. Expiration
of the SORNA registration period accordingly does not obviate the need
for sex offenders to check with registration jurisdictions whether they
remain subject to registration requirements under the jurisdictions'
laws.
As provided in paragraph (b) of Sec. 72.5, the registration period
under SORNA begins to run upon release from imprisonment following a
sex offense conviction, or at the time of sentencing for a sex offense
where imprisonment does not ensue. See 73 FR at 38068. The sex
offender's release from imprisonment, which marks the start of the
registration period for an incarcerated sex offender, may occur later
than the end of the sentence imposed for the sex offense itself. For
example, suppose that a sex offender is convicted for a fatal sexual
assault upon a victim, resulting in a sentence of three years of
imprisonment for the sexual assault and a concurrent or consecutive
sentence of 25 years of imprisonment for murder. Or consider a case in
which a sex offender is sentenced to three years of imprisonment for a
sexual assault and at a later time he is sentenced to 25 years of
imprisonment for an unrelated murder, while still imprisoned for the
sex offense. Or suppose that a sex offender is already serving a 25-
year prison term for an unrelated murder, when he is sentenced to three
years of imprisonment for a sexual assault. In all such cases, the
registration period under SORNA starts to run when the sex offender
actually completes his imprisonment and is released. It does not start
to run while the sex offender is still imprisoned but has completed the
portion of the sentence attributable to the sex offense.
This conclusion follows from the general design and specific
requirements of SORNA's registration procedures. SORNA provides that
incarcerated sex offenders must initially register ``before completing
a sentence of imprisonment with respect to the [registration]
offense.'' 34 U.S.C. 20913(b)(1). SORNA further states that the
correlative responsibilities of registration officials in effecting the
initial registration are to be carried out ``shortly before release of
the sex offender from custody.'' Id. 20919(a); see 73 FR at 38063
(explaining requirement to register shortly before release from
custody). Thereafter, sex offenders must ``keep the registration[s]
current'' for specified periods of time, depending on their
``tier[s].'' 34 U.S.C. 20915(a). In light of these provisions, the
registration period is logically understood as being framed at the
start by the release from custody and at the end by the termination of
the specified time period.
Considering specifically cases in which a sex offender is serving
an aggregate prison term for multiple crimes, 34 U.S.C. 20913(b)(1)
requires registration ``before completing a sentence of imprisonment
with respect to the offense giving rise to the registration
requirement.'' (Emphasis added). It does not require registration
``before completing a sentence of imprisonment for the offense giving
rise to the registration requirement.'' The broader ``with respect to''
language is best understood to mean that the relevant prison term under
section 20913(b)(1) is not the specific sentence imposed for the
predicate sex offense alone, but rather is the full related sentence of
imprisonment, including any prison time imposed for other crimes. The
corresponding language in section 20919(a) supports this understanding,
requiring initial registration of the sex offender ``shortly before
release of the sex offender from custody.'' This language does not
signify that initial registration is to occur when the sex offender is
about to complete the portion of an aggregate sentence attributable
specifically to the sex offense, though the sex offender will remain in
custody because he is serving additional time for another offense or
offenses. Rather, by its terms, section 20919(a) contemplates that
initial registration will occur shortly before the sex offender is
actually released, and section 20913(b)(1) must be understood in the
same way, because section 20913(b)(1) and section 20919(a) describe the
same transaction (initial registration) from different perspectives.
For example, consider the case of a sex offender convicted and
sentenced for a fatal sexual assault, resulting in a three-year prison
term for the sexual assault and a concurrent or consecutive 25-year
sentence for murder. Suppose that the sexual assault involved was a
sexual contact offense against an adult victim, resulting in the
classification of the sex offender as a tier I sex offender and a
registration period of 15 years. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(2)-(4),
20915(a)(1). If the registration period started to run at the end of
the first three years of the sex offender's incarceration, then the 15-
year registration period would expire long before the sex offender's
release, because of the extension of his imprisonment by the murder
sentence. This result would be at odds with section 20919(a)'s
direction that sex offenders are to be initially registered ``shortly
before release . . . from custody,'' because the sex offender's
registration obligation under SORNA would be a thing of the past by
that time, and also with the requirements under sections 20913 and
20915(a)(1) that the sex offender register and keep the registration
current for 15 years, because his registration period would be over
before he registered in the first place.
In addition to the inconsistency with the statutory provisions
discussed above, starting the running of the registration period upon
the conclusion of the portion of a sentence attributable to the
registration offense would result in arbitrary differences in
registration requirements, depending on fortuities in the structuring
of criminal sentences or their descriptions in judgments. For example,
considering again the case of a fatal sexual assault, suppose that the
resulting sentence involves a three-year prison term for the sexual
assault, followed by a consecutive 25-year prison term for murder. As
discussed above, the assumed 15-year registration period for the sexual
assault would then run out long before the sex offender's release, and
he would never have to register at all. But suppose the sentence is
cast instead as a 25-year prison term for murder, followed by a
consecutive three-year prison term for the sexual assault. The
completion of the prison term for the sexual assault would then
coincide with the sex offender's release from prison, and he would have
to register and keep the registration current for 15 years. Because the
ordering of the sexual assault and murder sentences has no relevance to
the public safety purposes served by sex offender registration, the
discrepancy between the two cases as to resulting registration
requirements would be irrational. For this reason as well, the
registration period under SORNA starts to run when the sex offender is
actually released, and not at an earlier time upon completion of the
portion of an aggregate sentence specifically attributable to the
predicate sex offense.
By way of comparison, an offender's term of post-imprisonment
supervised release for a sex offense does not start to run until he is
released from prison,
[[Page 69871]]
including in cases in which the offender's release is delayed by his
serving additional prison time for another offense or offenses. This is
not unfair or illogical; it rationally reflects the nature of
supervision as a measure designed for overseeing and managing offenders
following their release. While sex offender registration differs from
supervision in being a non-punitive, civil regulatory measure, see,
e.g., Smith, 538 U.S. at 92-106; Felts, 674 F.3d at 605-06, it is
likewise concerned with the post-release treatment of sex offenders in
the community. Hence, as with periods of supervision, it is rational
for an offender's registration period for a sex offense to begin to run
when he is released from prison, including in cases in which the
offender's release is delayed by his serving additional prison time for
other criminal conduct. This reflects the nature of registration as a
measure designed for tracking and monitoring sex offenders following
their release.
The principle that the registration period under SORNA commences on
release also applies to cases in which the sex offender is not
imprisoned for the sex offense per se but is imprisoned because of
conviction for another offense. For example, suppose that a sex
offender is convicted of sexually assaulting and robbing a victim,
resulting in a sentence of probation for the sexual assault and a
sentence of five years of imprisonment for the robbery. Considering the
relevant statutory provisions, section 20913(b)(2) makes applicable an
alternative time for initial registration--three business days after
sentencing--only ``if the sex offender is not sentenced to a term of
imprisonment.'' Correspondingly, section 20919(a) provides for initial
registration immediately after sentencing, rather than shortly before
release from custody, only ``if the sex offender is not in custody.''
These provisions, by their terms, do not apply to a sex offender who
remains in custody, though on the basis of an offense other than the
predicate sex offense. Hence, cases of this nature must fall under the
requirement of sections 20913(b)(1) and 20919(a) to effect initial
registration shortly before the sex offender's release, and the
consequences are the same as in the cases discussed above involving
aggregate prison terms for the registration offense and other crimes.
Where the sex offender receives a non-incarcerative sentence for the
registration offense and a prison term for another offense, the
registration period starts upon the sex offender's release, so that
once registered and out in the community he must keep the registration
current for the full registration period specified in 34 U.S.C. 20915,
and not just for a truncated period reduced by his incarceration for
another offense.
In terms of underlying policy, registration is by definition
concerned with tracking sex offenders in the community following their
release. See 73 FR at 38044-45. The tiers and the associated
registration periods under SORNA reflect categorical legislative
judgments as to how long sex offenders should be tracked following
release for public safety purposes. These judgments do not come into
play until the sex offender is released. When that happens may be
affected by many factors--such as the length of the prison term the sex
offender receives for the sex offense; whether the sex offender makes
parole (in a state system having parole) or gets good-conduct credit;
whether the jurisdiction adopts an early release program because of
prison crowding; and whether the sex offender gets additional prison
time because of sentencing for other offenses, related or unrelated to
the sex offense.
Whatever the reasons may be, it is logical to start a post-release
tracking regime--i.e., registration--when the sex offender is actually
released. Initial registration is to occur ``shortly before'' that, as
34 U.S.C. 20919(a) requires, ``in light of the underlying objectives of
ensuring that sex offenders have their registration obligations in mind
when they are released, and avoiding situations in which registration
information changes significantly between the time the initial
registration procedures are carried out and the time the offender is
released.'' 73 FR at 38063.
Hence, the registration period under SORNA starts to run when a sex
offender is released from imprisonment, and not at an earlier time when
the specific sentence for the registration offense has been served, if
the two times differ. This follows from the features of the statutory
provisions discussed above, from the absurdities entailed by a
different interpretation, and from the basic character of registration
as a post-release tracking measure. To the extent that there might be
any uncertainty or argument to the contrary, the Attorney General in
this rule exercises his authority under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b) to interpret
and implement SORNA's provisions affecting the duration of registration
in the manner stated.
Paragraph (c) in Sec. 72.5 sets out SORNA's reduction of its
registration period for certain sex offenders who maintain a ``clean
record'' in accordance with statutory standards. The specific ``clean
record'' conditions are that the sex offender not be convicted of any
felony or any sex offense, successfully complete any period of
supervision, and successfully complete an appropriate sex offender
treatment program (certified by a registration jurisdiction or the
Attorney General). The SORNA registration period is reduced by five
years for a tier I sex offender who maintains a clean record for 10
years, and reduced to the period for which the clean record is
maintained for a tier III sex offender required to register on the
basis of a juvenile delinquency adjudication who maintains a clean
record for 25 years. See 34 U.S.C. 20915(a), (b); 73 FR at 38068-69.
Section 72.6--Information Sex Offenders Must Provide
Section 72.6 sets out the registration information sex offenders
must provide. Much of the specified information is expressly required
by SORNA, see 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(1)-(7), and the remainder reflects
SORNA's direction that sex offenders must provide ``[a]ny other
information required by the Attorney General,'' id. 20914(a)(8).
In general terms, the required information comprises (i) name,
birth date, and Social Security number; (ii) remote communication
identifiers (including email addresses and telephone numbers); (iii)
information about places of residence, non-residential lodging,
employment, and school attendance; (iv) international travel; (v)
passports and immigration documents; (vi) vehicle information; and
(vii) professional licenses. By providing basic information about who a
sex offender is, where he is, how he gets around, and what he is
authorized to do, these requirements implement SORNA and further its
public safety objectives.
Paragraph (a)(1) of Sec. 72.6 requires that a sex offender provide
his name, including any alias, which is an express SORNA requirement.
See 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(1); 73 FR at 38055.E0.
Paragraph (a)(2) of Sec. 72.6 requires a sex offender to provide
date of birth information, a requirement the Attorney General has
adopted in the SORNA Guidelines and this rule because date of birth
information is regularly utilized as part of an individual's basic
identification information and hence is of value in helping to
identify, track, and locate registered sex offenders. The paragraph
requires that any date that the sex offender uses as his or her
purported date of birth must be provided, in addition to the actual
date of birth, because sex offenders may, for example,
[[Page 69872]]
provide false date of birth information in seeking employment that
would provide access to children or other potential victims. See 73 FR
at 38057.
Paragraph (a)(3) of Sec. 72.6 requires that a sex offender provide
his Social Security number, which is an express SORNA requirement. See
34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(2). The paragraph further requires provision of any
number that a sex offender uses as his purported Social Security
number. The Attorney General has adopted the latter requirement--
already appearing in the SORNA Guidelines in 2008--because sex
offenders may, for example, attempt to use false Social Security
numbers in seeking employment that would provide access to children or
other potential victims. See 73 FR at 38055.
Paragraph (b) of Sec. 72.6 requires a sex offender to provide all
remote communication identifiers that he uses in internet or telephonic
communications or postings, including email addresses and telephone
numbers. A provision of the Keeping the internet Devoid of Sexual
Predators Act of 2008 (KIDS Act), Public Law 110-400, directed the
Attorney General to use the authority under paragraph (7) of 34 U.S.C.
20914(a) [now designated paragraph (8)] to require sex offenders to
provide internet identifiers. The Attorney General has previously
exercised that authority to require the specified information in the
SORNA Guidelines. See 34 U.S.C. 20916(a); 73 FR at 38055; 76 FR at
1637. The Attorney General has exercised the same authority to require
telephone numbers--a requirement also already appearing in the SORNA
Guidelines--for a number of reasons, including facilitating
communication between registration personnel and sex offenders, and
addressing the potential use of telephonic communication by sex
offenders in efforts to contact or lure potential victims. See 73 FR at
38055.
Paragraph (c)(1) of Sec. 72.6 requires a sex offender to provide
residence address information or other residence location information
if the sex offender lacks a residence address. Providing residence
address information is an express SORNA requirement. See 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(3). In the SORNA Guidelines, and now in this rule, the
Attorney General has adopted the requirement to provide other residence
location information for sex offenders who do not have residence
addresses, such as homeless sex offenders or sex offenders living in
rural areas that lack street addresses, because having this type of
location information serves the same public safety purposes as knowing
the whereabouts of sex offenders with definite residence addresses. See
73 FR at 38055-56, 38061-62.
Paragraph (c)(2) of Sec. 72.6 requires a sex offender to provide
information about temporary lodging while away from his residence for
seven or more days. In the SORNA Guidelines, and now in this rule, the
Attorney General has adopted this requirement because sex offenders may
reoffend at locations away from the places in which they have a
permanent or long-term presence, and indeed could be encouraged to do
so to the extent that information about their places of residence is
available to the authorities but information is lacking concerning
their temporary lodgings elsewhere. The benefits of having this
information include facilitating the successful investigation of crimes
committed by sex offenders while away from their normal places of
residence and discouraging sex offenders from committing crimes in such
circumstances. See 73 FR at 38056.
Paragraph (c)(3) of Sec. 72.6 requires a sex offender to provide
employer name and address information, or other employment location
information if the sex offender lacks a fixed place of employment.
Providing employer name and address information is an express SORNA
requirement. See 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(4). The Attorney General has
adopted, in the SORNA Guidelines and this rule, the requirement to
provide other employment location information for sex offenders who
work but do not have fixed places of employment--e.g., a long-haul
trucker whose ``workplace'' is roads and highways throughout the
country, a self-employed handyman who works out of his home and does
repair or home improvement work at other people's homes, or a person
who frequents sites that contractors visit to obtain day labor and
works for any contractor who hires him on a given day. The Attorney
General has adopted this requirement because knowing where such sex
offenders are in the course of employment serves the same public safety
purposes as knowing the whereabouts of sex offenders who work at fixed
locations. See 73 FR at 38056, 38062.
Paragraph (c)(4) of Sec. 72.6 requires a sex offender to provide
the name and address of any place where the sex offender is or will be
a student, an express SORNA requirement. See 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(5); 73
FR at 38056-57, 38062.
Paragraph (d) of Sec. 72.6 requires a sex offender to provide
information about intended travel outside of the United States. This is
an express SORNA requirement, added by International Megan's Law. See
34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7); Public Law 114-119, sec. 6(a)(1). A related
provision in Sec. 72.7(f) of this rule requires sex offenders to
report international travel information at least 21 days in advance.
Exercising the general authority under paragraph (8) of 34 U.S.C.
20914(a) [then designated paragraph (7)] to expand the required range
of registration information, the Attorney General initially adopted
these requirements in the SORNA Supplemental Guidelines, see 76 FR at
1637-38, even before the enactment of International Megan's Law, for a
number of reasons:
(i) Realizing SORNA's public safety objectives requires that
registered sex offenders be effectively tracked as they leave and
return to the United States, and that other sex offenders who enter the
United States be identified, so that domestic registration and law
enforcement authorities know about the sex offenders' presence in the
United States and can ensure that they register while here as SORNA
requires. To that end, SORNA directs the Attorney General to establish
and maintain a system for informing relevant registration jurisdictions
about persons entering the United States whom SORNA requires to
register. See 34 U.S.C. 20930. Sections 72.6(d) and 72.7(f) of this
rule are part of that system, requiring registered sex offenders to
inform their registration jurisdictions about travel abroad, including
information that encompasses both their departure from and return to
the United States. Beyond this direct benefit, learning about sex
offenders' entry into the United States may depend on notice from the
authorities of the countries they come from--authorities who may expect
reciprocal notice about sex offenders traveling to their countries from
the United States. Having U.S. sex offenders inform their registration
jurisdictions of travel abroad provides information that is used by
U.S. authorities, including the U.S. Marshals Service and INTERPOL
Washington-U.S. National Central Bureau, to notify the authorities in
the destination countries about sex offenders traveling to their areas.
These foreign authorities may in return advise U.S. authorities about
sex offenders traveling to the United States from their countries,
facilitating the notification of domestic registration jurisdictions
about the sex offenders' presence that section 20930 contemplates. See
73 FR at 38066; 76 FR at 1637.
(ii) Sex offenders traveling abroad may remain subject in some
respects to U.S. jurisdiction, e.g., because a sex offender intends to
go to an overseas
[[Page 69873]]
U.S. military base or to work as or for a U.S. military contractor in
another country. In such cases, the intended travel of the sex offender
may implicate the same public safety concerns in relation to
communities abroad for which the United States has responsibility as it
does in relation to communities within the United States. See 73 FR at
38067; 76 FR at 1637-38.
(iii) More broadly, for a sex offender disposed to reoffend, it may
be attractive to travel to foreign countries where law enforcement is
weaker (or perceived to be weaker), where sexually trafficked children
or other vulnerable victims may be more readily available, and where
the registration and notification measures to which the sex offender is
subject in the United States are inoperative. The United States does
not wish to export the public safety threat posed by its sex offenders
to other countries. Requiring sex offenders in the United States to
inform their registration jurisdictions about international travel
provides a basis for notifying foreign authorities in the destination
countries, which helps to reduce the resulting risks. If these sex
offenders do reoffend in other countries, the resulting human harm to
victims is no less because it occurs in a foreign country, and the
United States' image and foreign relations interests may be adversely
affected as well. Sex offenders from the United States who commit sex
offenses in other countries may be subject to prosecution under various
Federal laws, which reflect the United States' policy of, and
commitment to, combating the commission of crimes of sexual abuse and
exploitation internationally as well as domestically. See, e.g., 18
U.S.C. 1591, 2251(c), 2260, 2423. Consistent tracking of international
travel by sex offenders helps to deter and prevent such crimes, and to
facilitate their investigation if they occur.
Beyond creating a general requirement to report travel outside of
the United States at least 21 days in advance, the SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines authorized the requirement of more definite information
about international travel plans. 76 FR at 1638 (additional directions
may be issued by the SMART Office ``concerning the information to be
required in sex offenders' reports of intended international travel,
such as information concerning expected itinerary, departure and return
dates, and means and purpose of travel''); see Notice of International
Travel, https://smart.ojp.gov/sorna/notice-international-travel
(providing such directions). Section 72.6(d) in this rule specifically
directs sex offenders traveling abroad to report information regarding
any anticipated itinerary, dates and places of departure, arrival, or
return, carrier and flight numbers for air travel, destination
countries and address or contact information therein, and means and
purpose of travel. More detailed information of this type is needed
because notice only that a sex offender intends to travel somewhere
outside of the United States at some time three weeks or more in the
future would be inadequate to realize the objectives of international
tracking of sex offenders--objectives that include, as discussed above,
notification as appropriate of U.S. and foreign authorities in
destination countries for public safety purposes, preventing and
detecting the offenders' commission of sex offenses in other countries,
and reliably tracking sex offenders as they leave and enter the United
States for purposes of enforcing registration requirements. Requiring
the specified information concerning international travel is justified
by its value in furthering these objectives. See 73 FR at 38066-67; 76
FR at 1634, 1637-38.
Congress endorsed these objectives and the stated conclusion in
International Megan's Law, whose purposes include ``[t]o protect
children and others from sexual abuse and exploitation, including sex
trafficking and sex tourism, by providing advance notice of intended
travel by registered sex offenders outside the United States to the
government of the country of destination [and] requesting foreign
governments to notify the United States when a known sex offender is
seeking to enter the United States.'' Public Law 114-119; see 162 Cong.
Rec. H390-94 (Feb. 1, 2016) (explanation in House floor debate on
passage). As noted above, the measures adopted by International Megan's
Law in support of its international notification system include an
express requirement that sex offenders report intended international
travel, making this requirement a permanent feature of SORNA that
exists independently of regulatory action. See 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7);
Public Law 114-119, sec. 6(a)(1).
Section 72.6(d) in this rule follows the new SORNA travel
information provision added by International Megan's Law, which states
that sex offenders must provide ``[i]nformation relating to intended
travel of the sex offender outside the United States, including any
anticipated dates and places of departure, arrival, or return, carrier
and flight numbers for air travel, destination country and address or
other contact information therein, means and purpose of travel, and any
other itinerary or other travel-related information required by the
Attorney General.'' 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7). A sex offender must report
all anticipated information in these categories in relation to both the
United States and destination countries as the language of Sec.
72.6(d) makes clear. For example, a sex offender who is leaving the
United States must report any anticipated date and place of departure
from the United States, and also any anticipated date and place of
return to the United States if the sex offender expects to return.
Likewise, with respect to each foreign country to be visited, the sex
offender must report any anticipated date and place of arrival in that
country and any anticipated date and place of departure from that
country.
Paragraph (e) of Sec. 72.6 requires a sex offender to provide
information concerning any passport or passports he has, and concerning
documents establishing his immigration status if he is an alien. The
passports referenced in the paragraph include passports of all types
and nationalities, not just U.S. passports. Where the sex offender has
multiple passports, as may occur, for example, in cases involving dual
citizenship, the paragraph's reference to ``each passport'' the sex
offender has means that the sex offender must report all of his
passports. The Attorney General has included information about
passports and immigration documents as required registration
information in the SORNA Guidelines and in this rule because having
this type of information in the registries serves various purposes.
These include locating and apprehending registrants who may attempt to
leave the United States after committing new sex offenses or
registration violations, facilitating the tracking and identification
of registrants who leave the United States but later reenter while
still required to register, see 34 U.S.C. 20930, and crosschecking the
accuracy and completeness of other types of information that
registrants are required to provide--e.g., if immigration documents
show that an alien registrant is in the United States on a student visa
but the registrant fails to provide school attendance information as
required by 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(5). See 73 FR at 38056.
Paragraph (f) of Sec. 72.6 requires a sex offender to provide
information concerning any vehicle owned or operated by the sex
offender, information concerning the license plate number or other
registration number or identifier for the vehicle, and information as
to where the vehicle is habitually kept. In part, the paragraph
reflects the express SORNA requirement
[[Page 69874]]
in 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(6) that a sex offender provide ``[t]he license
plate number and a description of any vehicle owned or operated by the
sex offender.'' This includes, in addition to vehicles registered to
the sex offender, any vehicle that the sex offender regularly drives,
either for personal use or in the course of employment. See 73 FR at
38057. The remainder of the paragraph reflects the Attorney General's
requirement (previously adopted in the SORNA Guidelines) of additional
vehicle-related information that serves similar purposes or may be
useful to help prevent flight, facilitate investigation, or effect an
apprehension if the sex offender commits new offenses or violates
registration requirements. See id.
Paragraph (g) of Sec. 72.6 requires a sex offender to provide
information concerning all licensing of the offender that authorizes
him to engage in an occupation or carry out a trade or business. The
Attorney General has adopted this requirement, initially in the SORNA
Guidelines and now in this rule, because information of this type (i)
may be helpful in locating a registered sex offender if he absconds,
(ii) may provide a basis for notifying the responsible licensing
authority if the offender's conviction of a sex offense may affect his
eligibility for the license, and (iii) may be useful in crosschecking
the accuracy and completeness of other information the offender is
required to provide--e.g., if the sex offender is licensed to engage in
a certain occupation but does not provide name or place of employment
information as required by 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(4) for such an
occupation. See 73 FR at 38056.
Section 72.7--How Sex Offenders Must Register and Keep the Registration
Current
SORNA requires sex offenders to register and keep the registrations
current in jurisdictions in which they reside, work, or attend school.
Section 72.7 sets out the procedures for doing so, addressing the
timing requirements for registering and updating registrations, the
jurisdictions to which changes in registration information must be
reported, and the means for reporting such changes. In general terms,
the section requires (i) initial registration before release from
imprisonment, or within three business days after sentencing if the sex
offender is not imprisoned; (ii) periodic in-person appearances to
verify and update the registration information; (iii) reporting of
changes in name, residence, employment, or school attendance; (iv)
reporting of intended departure or termination of residence,
employment, or school attendance in a jurisdiction; (v) reporting of
changes relating to remote communication identifiers, temporary lodging
information, and vehicle information; (vi) reporting of international
travel; and (vii) compliance with a jurisdiction's rules if a sex
offender has not complied with the normal time and manner
specifications for carrying out a SORNA requirement.
The requirements articulated in this section in part appear
expressly in SORNA and in part reflect exercises of the powers SORNA
confers on the Attorney General to further specify its requirements.
The authorities relied on include the following:
SORNA directs the Attorney General to issue rules and guidelines to
``interpret and implement'' its provisions, which include the basic
requirement that each sex offender must ``register . . . and keep the
registration current.'' 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(a). Previously in the
SORNA Guidelines, see 73 FR at 38062-67, and now in this rule, the
Attorney General interprets his authority to ``interpret and
implement'' SORNA as including the authority to articulate a
comprehensive, gap-free set of procedural requirements for registering
and updating registrations. Authority of this nature is needed to
implement SORNA in conformity with the legislative objective of
protecting the public from sex offenders by establishing a
comprehensive national system for their registration. 34 U.S.C. 20901.
Beyond the public safety need, this understanding of section 20912(b)
``takes Congress to have filled potential lacunae'' in SORNA in a
manner consistent with fair notice concerns, empowering the Attorney
General to eliminate any ``vagueness and uncertainty'' regarding how
sex offenders are to comply with SORNA's registration requirements.
Reynolds, 565 U.S. at 441-42.
The Attorney General's authority to interpret and implement SORNA
includes in particular the authority to adopt additional specifications
regarding the time and manner in which its requirements must be carried
out. For example, SORNA expressly requires that sex offenders must
appear in person to report changes of name, residence, employment, and
student status within three business days of such changes. 34 U.S.C.
20913(c). But SORNA does not expressly require the reporting within a
particular timeframe of changes relating to other types of registration
information that also bear directly and importantly on the
identification, tracking, and location of sex offenders. These include
remote communication identifiers (such as email addresses), temporary
lodging information, international travel information, and vehicle
information, as described in Sec. 72.6(b), (c)(2), (d), and (f) of
this rule. Absent a requirement that changes in these types of
information be reported promptly, the information in the registries
about these matters could become seriously out of date, which would in
turn impair SORNA's basic objective of effectively tracking and
locating sex offenders in the community following their release. See 73
FR at 38044-45, 38066-67. The Attorney General accordingly has adopted
definite timing requirements for reporting changes in these types of
information, previously in the guidelines for SORNA implementation, and
now in Sec. 72.7(e)-(f) in this rule.
Adopting such rules reflects an exercise of the Attorney General's
authority to ``interpret and implement'' SORNA, 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), and
more specifically to interpret and implement SORNA's requirement that
sex offenders must ``keep the registration current,'' id. 20913(a).
While the heading of subsection (c) of section 20913 is ``[k]eeping the
registration current,'' the heading only signifies that the subsection
sets out an updating rule for the most basic types of registration
information. It does not signify that nothing more can be required to
keep the registration current. The contrary is evident from section
20915(a), which specifies the duration of required registration under
SORNA. Section 20915(a) uses the same terminology, stating that a sex
offender ``shall keep the registration current'' for the relevant
period of time. Obviously, in providing that a sex offender must ``keep
the registration current'' for a specified period, section 20915(a)
defines the period of time during which a sex offender must continue to
comply with all of SORNA's requirements, given the absence of any other
provision in SORNA specifying how long sex offenders must comply with
its various requirements. Among other consequences, this means that sex
offenders must appear in person periodically to verify and update their
registration information, as required by section 20918, for the
specified period of time--not just that they must report changes in
name, residence, employment, and school attendance, as provided in
section 20913(c), for the specified period of time. That consideration
alone demonstrates that section 20913(c) does not exhaust SORNA's
requirements for ``keep[ing] the registration current.''
[[Page 69875]]
Regarding other matters, such as changes in registration
information relating to remote communication identifiers, temporary
lodging, vehicles, and international travel, the Attorney General has
understood the authority to interpret and implement SORNA's requirement
to keep the registration current as including the authority to adopt
specific time and manner requirements for the reporting of such
changes. Congress ratified this understanding in the KIDS Act. In that
Act, Congress provided that (i) ``[t]he Attorney General, using the
authority provided in [34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(8)], shall require that each
sex offender provide to the sex offender registry those internet
identifiers the sex offender uses or will use'' and (ii) ``[t]he
Attorney General, using the authority provided in [34 U.S.C. 20912(b)],
shall specify the time and manner for keeping current information
required to be provided under this section.'' 34 U.S.C. 20916(a)-(b).
Notably, Congress did not find it necessary to make new grants of
authority to the Attorney General for these purposes and instead
directed the Attorney General to utilize the pre-existing authorities
under SORNA to require internet identifier information and specify the
time and manner for keeping it current. This confirms that the section
20912(b) authority includes the authority to adopt additional time and
manner requirements in the rules and guidelines the Attorney General
issues.
SORNA directs sex offenders to provide for inclusion in the sex
offender registry several expressly described types of registration
information and, in addition, ``[a]ny other information required by the
Attorney General.'' Id. 20914(a)(8). The section 20914(a)(8) authority
underlies the specification of required types of registration
information in Sec. 72.6 in this rule beyond those expressly set forth
in section 20914(a)(1)-(7). The section 20914(a)(8) authority also
provides an additional, independent legal basis for various
requirements in Sec. 72.7, including a number of timing rules it
incorporates.
In relation to some types of required registration information
under this rule, which may be based wholly or in part on the exercise
of the Attorney General's authority under section 20914(a)(8), a timing
requirement is inherent in the nature of the information that must be
reported. This is true of the requirement under Sec. 72.7(d) to report
if a sex offender will be commencing residence, employment, or school
attendance elsewhere or will be terminating residence, employment, or
school attendance in a jurisdiction. It is likewise true of the
requirement under Sec. 72.7(f) to report intended international
travel. Because these provisions constitute requirements to report
present intentions regarding expected future actions, the information
they require necessarily must be reported in advance of the expected
actions.
Section 20914(a)(8) also provides an additional, independent legal
basis for more specific timeframe requirements appearing in Sec. 72.7
of this rule. One of these requirements is that intended international
travel is to be reported at least 21 days in advance of the travel, as
provided in Sec. 72.7(f). In substance, this is a requirement that a
sex offender report to the residence jurisdiction an intention to
travel outside of the United States at some time 21 days or more in the
future. Viewing the expected timing of the travel as an aspect of the
required information, it is within the Attorney General's authority
under 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(8) to require sex offenders to provide ``[a]ny
other information''--and following the adoption of section 20914(a)(7)
by International Megan's Law, within the Attorney General's more
specific authority under the latter provision to require ``any other .
. . travel-related information.'' Essentially the same point applies to
the rule's specification that sex offenders must report within three
business days changes relating to certain types of registration
information the Attorney General has required. Section 72.7(e) directs
reporting of changes in information within that timeframe relating to
remote communication identifiers, temporary lodging, and vehicles.
Viewed as requirements to report the information that certain actions
or occurrences have taken place within the preceding three business
days, these requirements are within the Attorney General's authority
under 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(8).
Turning to another SORNA provision supporting time and manner
requirements, 34 U.S.C. 20913(d) authorizes the Attorney General to
specify the applicability of SORNA's requirements to sex offenders
convicted before the enactment of SORNA 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).'' The cross-referenced
``subsection (b)'' is the SORNA provision that requires sex offenders
to register initially before release from imprisonment, or within three
business days of sentencing if the sex offender is not imprisoned. As
discussed below in connection with Sec. 72.7(a)(2) of this rule, sex
offenders released from Federal or military custody and sex offenders
convicted in foreign countries generally are unable to register prior
to release. The section 20913(d) authority to prescribe registration
rules for sex offenders ``unable to comply with subsection (b)''
accordingly provides one of the legal bases for the alternative timing
rules in Sec. 72.7(a)(2), which direct registration by sex offenders
in the affected classes within three business days of entering a
jurisdiction following release.
The authorities described above--under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b),
20913(d), and 20914(a)(8)--provided the basis for the Attorney
General's adoption of time and manner specifications for complying with
SORNA's registration requirements in previously issued guidelines under
SORNA. More recently, International Megan's Law added an express,
general grant of authority to the Attorney General to make such
specifications. The relevant provision is 34 U.S.C. 20914(c), which
reads as follows: ``(c) TIME AND MANNER.--A sex offender shall provide
and update information required under subsection (a), including
information relating to intended travel outside the United States
required under paragraph (7) of that subsection, in conformity with any
time and manner requirements prescribed by the Attorney General.''
The cross-referenced ``subsection (a)'' is SORNA's list of all the
registration information that sex offenders must provide. Hence, the
new section 20914(c) requires sex offenders to comply with the Attorney
General's directions regarding the time and manner for providing and
updating all registration information required by SORNA. In addition to
empowering the Attorney General to specify the time and manner for
reporting particular types of registration information, this provision
enables the Attorney General to specify the time and manner for
registration. This is so because registration on the part of a sex
offender consists of providing required registration information to the
registration jurisdiction for inclusion in the sex offender registry.
Given that the Attorney General has the authority under section
20914(c) to specify the time and manner for a sex offender's provision
of each required type of registration information, it follows that the
Attorney General has the authority under section 20914(c) to specify
the time and manner for a sex offender's provision of the required
types of information collectively, which constitutes registration under
SORNA.
[[Page 69876]]
Paragraph (a)--Initial Registration
Paragraph (a)(1) of Sec. 72.7 tracks SORNA's general rule that a
sex offender must initially register--that is, register for the first
time based on a sex offense conviction--before release from
imprisonment, or within three business days of sentencing in case of a
non-incarcerative sentence. See 34 U.S.C. 20913(b) (initial
registration by sex offenders); id. 20919(a) (complementary duties of
registration officials); 73 FR at 38062-65 (related explanation in
guidelines).
Paragraph (a)(2)(i) of Sec. 72.7 addresses the situation of sex
offenders who are released from Federal or military custody or
sentenced for a Federal or military sex offense. There is no separate
Federal registration program for such offenders. Hence, Federal
authorities cannot register these offenders prior to their release from
custody or near the time of sentencing. This is in contrast to the
authorities of the SORNA registration jurisdictions--the states, the
District of Columbia, the five principal U.S. territories, and
qualifying Indian tribes--who may register their sex offenders prior to
release or near sentencing as provided in 34 U.S.C. 20913(b), 20919(a).
SORNA instead enacted special provisions under which Federal
correctional and supervision authorities (i) are required to inform
Federal (including military) offenders with sex offense convictions
that they must register as required by SORNA and (ii) must notify the
(non-Federal) jurisdictions in which the sex offenders will reside
following release or sentencing so that these jurisdictions can
integrate the sex offenders into their registration programs. See 18
U.S.C. 4042(c); Public Law 105-119, sec. 115(a)(8)(C), as amended by
Public Law 109-248, sec. 141(i) (10 U.S.C. 951 note); 73 FR at 38064;
see also 18 U.S.C. 3563(a)(8); id. 3583(d) (third sentence); id.
4209(a) (second sentence) (mandatory Federal supervision condition to
comply with SORNA); 34 U.S.C 20931 (requiring the Secretary of Defense
to provide to the Attorney General military sex offender information
for inclusion in the National Sex Offender Registry and National Sex
Offender Public website).
The timing rule adopted for such situations is that sex offenders
released from Federal or military custody or convicted of Federal or
military sex offenses but not sentenced to imprisonment must register
within three business days of entering or remaining in a jurisdiction
to reside, see 73 FR at 38064, which parallels SORNA's normal timeframe
for registering or updating a registration following changes of
residence, see 34 U.S.C. 20913(c). Section 72.7(a)(2)(i) refers to a
sex offender entering ``or remaining'' in a jurisdiction to reside
because, for example, a Federal sex offender released from a Federal
prison located in a state may remain in that state to reside, rather
than relocating to some other state. In such a case, the three-
business-day period for registering with the state runs from the time
of the sex offender's release.
In terms of legal authority, the requirement of Sec. 72.7(a)(2)(i)
is supported by the Attorney General's authority to interpret and
implement SORNA's requirement to register in the jurisdiction of
residence, 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(a); the Attorney General's
authority under section 20913(d) to prescribe rules for the
registration of sex offenders who are unable to comply with section
20913(b)'s timing rule for initial registration; and the Attorney
General's authority under section 20914(c) to adopt time and manner
specifications for providing and updating registration information,
which includes the authority to adopt time and manner specifications
for registration as discussed above. Viewing a sex offender's being
released from Federal or military custody and taking up residence in a
jurisdiction as a change of residence, this requirement is also
supportable as a direct application of section 20913(c).
Paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of Sec. 72.7 addresses the situation of
persons required to register on the basis of foreign sex offense
convictions. Registration by the convicting state is not an available
option under SORNA in such cases because foreign states are not
registration jurisdictions under SORNA. See 34 U.S.C. 20911(10). Also,
there may be no domestic jurisdiction in which SORNA requires such
offenders to register--if they are not residing, working, or attending
school in the United States at the time they are released from custody
or sentenced in the foreign country--but SORNA's requirements will
apply if they travel or return to the United States. The rule adopted
for foreign conviction situations is that the sex offender must
register within three business days of entering a domestic jurisdiction
to reside, work, or attend school, see 73 FR at 38050-51, 38064-65,
which parallels SORNA's normal timeframe for registering or updating a
registration following changes of residence, employment, or student
status, see 34 U.S.C. 20913(c).
In terms of legal authority, this requirement is supported by the
Attorney General's authority to interpret and implement SORNA's
requirement to register in jurisdictions of residence, employment, and
school attendance, 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(a); the Attorney General's
authority under section 20913(d) to prescribe rules for the
registration of sex offenders who are unable to comply with section
20913(b)'s timing rule for initial registration; and the Attorney
General's authority under section 20914(c) to adopt time and manner
specifications for providing and updating registration information,
which includes the authority to adopt time and manner specifications
for registration as discussed above. Insofar as a sex offender's travel
or return to the United States following a foreign conviction involves
a change of residence, employment, or student status, this requirement
is also supportable as a direct application of section 20913(c).
Paragraph (b)--Periodic In-Person Verification
Paragraph (b) of Sec. 72.7 sets out the express requirement of 34
U.S.C. 20918 that sex offenders periodically appear in person in the
jurisdictions in which they are required to register, allow the
jurisdictions to take current photographs, and verify their
registration information, with the frequency of the required
appearances determined by their tiering. See 73 FR at 38067-68.
The second sentence of paragraph (b), exercising the Attorney
General's authority under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), interprets and implements
section 20918's requirement of verifying the information in each
registry to include correcting any information that is out of date or
inaccurate and reporting any new registration information. With respect
to most types of registration information, other provisions of Sec.
72.7 require reporting of changes within shorter timeframes than the
intervals between periodic in-person appearances for verification.
Hence, a sex offender who has complied with SORNA's requirements is
likely to have reported changes in most types of registration
information prior to his next verification appearance. But Sec. 72.7
does not specially address the time and manner for reporting changes in
some types of registration information. See Sec. 72.6(a)(2)-(3), (e),
(g) (requiring as well information concerning actual and purported
dates of birth and Social Security numbers, passports and immigration
documents, and professional licenses). Sex offenders can
[[Page 69877]]
keep their registrations current with respect to the latter categories
of information by reporting any changes in their periodic
verifications. See 73 FR at 38067-68.
Paragraph (c)--Reporting of Initiation and Changes Concerning Name,
Residence, Employment, and School Attendance
Paragraph (c) of Sec. 72.7 is based on SORNA's express requirement
that ``[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 [34 U.S.C.
20913(a)] and inform that jurisdiction of all changes in the
information required for that offender in the sex offender registry.''
34 U.S.C. 20913(c); see 73 FR at 38065-66.
While SORNA provides a definite timeframe for reporting these
changes (within three business days), specifies a means of reporting
(through in-person appearance), and requires reporting of a change in
``at least 1 jurisdiction,'' it does not specify the particular
jurisdiction in which each kind of change--i.e., change in name,
residence, employment, or school attendance--is to be reported. As
discussed earlier, the Attorney General's authority under 34 U.S.C.
20912(b) to interpret and implement SORNA includes the authority to
further specify the manner in which changes in registration information
are to be reported where there are such gaps or ambiguities in SORNA's
statutory provisions. In addition, the Attorney General now has express
authority under 34 U.S.C. 20914(c) to prescribe the manner in which all
required registration information is to be provided and updated.
Exercising those authorities in paragraph (c) in Sec. 72.7, the
Attorney General interprets and implements the requirement of section
20913(c), and prescribes the manner in which sex offenders must provide
and update information about name, residence, employment, or student
status, by specifying the particular jurisdiction in which a sex
offender must appear to report the changes section 20913(c) describes--
in the residence jurisdiction to report a change of name or residence,
in the employment jurisdiction to report a change of employment, and in
the jurisdiction of school attendance to report a change in school
attendance. See 73 FR at 38065.
For example, suppose that a sex offender resides in state A and
commutes to work in State B. Pursuant to 34 U.S.C. 20913(a), the sex
offender must register in both states--in State A as his residence
state, and in State B as his employment state. Suppose that the sex
offender changes his place of residence in State A and continues to
work at the same place in State B. Logically, the sex offender should
carry out his in-person appearance in State A to report his change of
residence in State A, rather than in State B, where his contact with
the latter state (employment) has not changed. Conversely, varying the
example, suppose that the sex offender changes his place of employment
from one employer to another in State B, but continues to reside in the
same place in State A. The sex offender should carry out his in-person
appearance in state B to report his change of employment in State B,
rather than in State A, where his contact with the latter state
(residence) has not changed.
These conclusions follow from the underlying policies of SORNA's
in-person appearance requirements, which aim to provide opportunities
for face to face encounters between sex offenders and persons
responsible for their registrations in the local areas in which they
will be present. Such encounters may help law enforcement personnel to
familiarize themselves with the sex offenders in their areas, thereby
facilitating the effective discharge of their protective and
investigative functions in relation to those sex offenders, and helping
to ensure that their responsibilities to track those offenders are
taken seriously and carried out consistently. 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. See 73 FR at 38065, 38067.
These policies are furthered by sex offenders appearing in person
to report changes in residence, employment, and school attendance in
the jurisdictions in which the changes occur, rather than in other
jurisdictions where they may be required to register, but within whose
borders there has been no change in the location of the sex offender.
Section 72.7(c) in the rule accordingly provides that changes in the
most basic types of location information--residence, employment, school
attendance--are to be reported through in-person appearances in the
jurisdictions in which they occur. Section 72.7(c) also provides
definiteness regarding the reporting of name changes under 34 U.S.C.
20913(c), providing that such changes are to be reported in the
residence jurisdiction, as the jurisdiction in which a sex offender is
likely to have his most substantial presence and contacts.
Paragraph (d)--Reporting of Departure and Termination Concerning
Residence, Employment, and School Attendance
Paragraph (d) of Sec. 72.7 requires sex offenders to inform the
jurisdictions in which they reside if they will be commencing
residence, employment, or school attendance in another jurisdiction or
outside of the United States, and to inform the relevant jurisdictions
if they will be terminating residence, employment, or school attendance
in a jurisdiction. The Attorney General has previously articulated
these requirements in the SORNA Guidelines. See 73 FR at 38065-67.
These requirements are not part of the requirement under 34 U.S.C.
20913(c) to report certain changes through in-person appearances and
they may be reported by any means allowed by registration jurisdictions
in their discretion. See 73 FR at 38067.
Paragraph (d)(1) of Sec. 72.7, relating to notice about intended
commencement of residence, employment, or school attendance outside of
a jurisdiction, and paragraph (d)(2), relating to notice about
termination of residence, employment, or school attendance in a
jurisdiction, are complementary, each applying in certain situations
that may be outside the scope of the other. For example, Sec.
72.7(d)(1) requires a sex offender to inform his residence jurisdiction
if he will be starting a job in another jurisdiction, even if he will
continue to reside where he has resided and will not be terminating any
existing connection to the residence jurisdiction. Section 72.7(d)(2)
requires a sex offender to inform a jurisdiction of his intended
termination of residence, employment, or school attendance in that
jurisdiction ``even if there is no ascertainable or expected future
place of residence, employment, or school attendance for the sex
offender.'' 73 FR at 38066.
Regarding the underlying legal authority for Sec. 72.7(d), its
informational requirements overlap with types of information 34 U.S.C.
20914(a) expressly requires sex offenders to provide, which include
information as to where a sex offender ``will reside,'' ``will be an
employee,'' or ``will be a student.'' Id. 20914(a)(3)-(5). To the
extent Sec. 72.7(d) goes beyond the registration information that
SORNA expressly requires, it is a straightforward exercise of the
Attorney
[[Page 69878]]
General's authority under 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(8) to require any
additional registration information.
Even before the enactment of International Megan's Law, the
Attorney General's implementation authority under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b)
was understood to include the authority to specify time and manner
requirements for providing and updating registration information, as
discussed above. Currently, section 20914(c) confers express authority
on the Attorney General to adopt the time and manner requirements set
forth in Sec. 72.7(d)--i.e., that (i) intended commencement of
residence, employment, or school attendance in another jurisdiction or
outside the United States is to be reported to the residence
jurisdiction (by whatever means it allows) prior to any termination of
residence in that jurisdiction and prior to commencing residence,
employment, or school attendance in the other jurisdiction or outside
of the United States; and (ii) intended termination of residence,
employment, or school attendance in a jurisdiction is to be reported to
the jurisdiction (by whatever means it allows) prior to the termination
of residence, employment, or school attendance in the jurisdiction.
Section 72.7(d)'s requirement that the intended actions or changes are
to be reported prior to the termination of residence, employment, or
school attendance in the relevant jurisdiction ensures that the
reporting requirement applies while the sex offender is still subject
to the requirement to register and keep the registration current in the
jurisdiction pursuant to 34 U.S.C. 20913(a). This approach avoids any
question about the validity of requiring a sex offender to provide or
update information in a jurisdiction in which he is no longer required
to register under SORNA.
The exercise of the authorities described above in Sec. 72.7(d)
furthers SORNA's objective of creating a ``comprehensive national
system for the registration of [sex] offenders,'' 34 U.S.C. 20901,
which reliably tracks sex offenders as they move away from and into
registration jurisdictions. A sex offender's departure from a
jurisdiction in which he is registered may eventually be discovered--
e.g., because he fails to appear for the next periodic verification of
his registration, see id. 20918--even if he does not affirmatively
notify the jurisdiction that he is leaving. But considerable time may
elapse before that happens, leaving a cold trail for law enforcement
efforts to locate the sex offender, if he does not register in the
destination jurisdiction as SORNA requires.
For example, for a sex offender who decides to change his residence
from one state to another, Sec. 72.7(d) requires the sex offender to
inform the state he is leaving prior to his departure, and Sec.
72.7(c) requires him to inform the destination state within three
business days of his arrival there. Under SORNA's procedures for
information sharing among registration jurisdictions, the state of
origin in such a case directly notifies the identified destination
state. See 34 U.S.C. 20921(b), 20923(b)(3); 73 FR at 38065; 76 FR at
1638. If the sex offender then fails to appear and register as expected
in the destination state, appropriate follow-up ensues, which may
include investigative efforts by state and local law enforcement and
the U.S. Marshals Service to locate the sex offender, issuance of a
warrant for his arrest, and entry of information into national law
enforcement databases reflecting the sex offender's status as an
absconder or unlocatable. See 34 U.S.C. 20924; 73 FR at 38069. In the
context of this system, the requirement of Sec. 72.7(d) for a sex
offender to notify the residence jurisdiction concerning his departure
is an important element. It helps to ensure that agencies and officials
responsible for sex offender registration and its enforcement are
promptly made aware of major changes in the location of sex offenders,
and thereby reduces the risk that sex offenders will disappear in the
interstices between jurisdictions.
In so doing, Sec. 72.7(d) resolves certain potential problems in
the operation of SORNA's registration system following the Supreme
Court's decision in Nichols v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1113 (2016),
and a similar earlier decision by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals,
United States v. Lunsford, 725 F.3d 859 (8th Cir. 2013). Nichols
involved a sex offender who abandoned his residence in Kansas and
relocated to the Philippines, without informing the Kansas registration
authorities of his departure. The issue in the case was whether Nichols
had violated 34 U.S.C. 20913(c), which requires a sex offender ``not
later than three business days after each change of name, residence,
employment, or student status'' to ``appear in person in at least 1
jurisdiction involved pursuant to subsection (a) and inform that
jurisdiction of all changes'' in the required registration information.
The Court noted that subsection (a) of section 20913 mentions three
jurisdictions as possibly ``involved''--``where the offender resides,
where the offender is an employee, and where the offender is a
student''-- which would not include the state of Kansas after Nichols
had moved to the Philippines. Nichols, 136 S. Ct. at 1117 (quoting 34
U.S.C. 20913(a)). The Court further noted that section 20913(c)
requires appearance and registration within three business days after a
change of residence, and Nichols could not have appeared in Kansas
after he left the state. Id. at 1117-18. The Court accordingly
concluded that Nichols' failure to inform Kansas of his departure was
not a violation of section 20913(c), since Kansas was no longer an
``involved'' jurisdiction in which section 20913(c) may require a sex
offender to report changes in residence. Id. at 1118.
Applying the same reasoning to the domestic context, if a sex
offender terminates his residence in a state and thereafter takes up
residence in another state, he cannot violate section 20913(c) by
failing to inform the state he is leaving. For, following the
termination of residence in that state, it is no longer a
``jurisdiction involved'' for purposes of section 20913(c).
There is no comparable problem, however, with Sec. 72.7(d)'s
requirement that a sex offender inform a jurisdiction in which he
resides of his intended departure from the jurisdiction, because Sec.
72.7(d) does not depend on the requirements of section 20913(c).
Rather, Sec. 72.7(d) is grounded in the requirement of section
20914(a) that sex offenders provide certain information, including
``[a]ny other information required by the Attorney General,'' and the
requirement of section 20914(c) that they report the required
information in the ``time and manner . . . prescribed by the Attorney
General.''
The Attorney General's exercise of his authorities under section
20914(a) and 20914(c) to require sex offenders to inform their
registration jurisdictions that they will be going elsewhere in no way
conflicts with Nichols' conclusion that section 20913(c) does not
require such pre-departure notice of intended relocation. Section
20914(a)(8) says that sex offenders must provide ``[a]ny other
information required by the Attorney General.'' The statute does not
say that sex offenders must provide ``[a]ny other information required
by the Attorney General, except for information about intended
departure from the jurisdiction.'' Nichols' interpretation of section
20913(c) provides no basis for reading such an unstated limitation into
section 20914(a)(8). Likewise, Nichols provides no basis for reading
unstated limitations into the Attorney General's authority--now
expressly granted by section 20914(c)--to prescribe time and manner
requirements for providing and updating registration information, which
adequately supports Sec. 72.7(d)'s
[[Page 69879]]
requirement that a sex offender inform the jurisdiction in which he
resides about intended departure prior to any termination of residence
and before going elsewhere.
The Attorney General's adoption of the Sec. 72.7(d) requirements
is also consistent with the Supreme Court's analysis of particular
arguments and issues in Nichols. The salient points are as follows:
First, the Court in Nichols noted that the predecessor Federal sex
offender registration law (the ``Wetterling Act'') required a sex
offender to ``report the change of address to the responsible agency in
the State the person is leaving,'' while SORNA contains no comparable
provision that expressly requires sex offenders to notify jurisdictions
they are leaving. 136 S. Ct. at 1118 (quoting 42 U.S.C. 14071(b)(5)
(2000)). However, SORNA does not attempt to articulate all the
particulars of its registration requirements for sex offenders, instead
authorizing the Attorney General to complete the regulatory scheme
through interpretation and implementation of SORNA. See, e.g., 34
U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(d), 20914(a)(8), 20914(c). Given the extent of
the Attorney General's powers under SORNA, it was not necessary for
Congress to include an express provision in SORNA requiring sex
offenders to notify jurisdictions they are leaving. Nor can there be
any doubt that requiring such notification is now within the terms of
the Attorney General's powers under SORNA, as discussed above. Indeed,
34 U.S.C. 20923(b)(3)--which provides that a jurisdiction's officials
are to inform each jurisdiction ``from or to which a change of
residence, employment, or student status occurs''--contemplates the
Attorney General's adoption of requirements like those appearing in
Sec. 72.7(d). For if sex offenders were not required to advise the
jurisdictions they leave of their departure and destination, those
jurisdictions could not inform the jurisdictions ``to which'' sex
offenders relocate.
Second, the Court in Nichols rejected an argument that a
jurisdiction necessarily remains ``involved'' for purposes of section
20913(c) if the sex offender continues to appear on the jurisdiction's
registry as a current resident. The Court responded that section
20913(a) gives jurisdictions where the offender resides, is an
employee, or is a student as the only possibilities for an ``involved''
jurisdiction, and does not include a jurisdiction ``where the offender
appears on a registry.'' 136 S. Ct. at 1118. The Court said ``[w]e
decline the . . . invitation to add an extra clause to the text of
Sec. [20]913(a).'' Id. In contrast, Sec. 72.7(d) in this rule does
not require the addition of an extra clause to section 20913(a). It
involves the exercise of the Attorney General's authorities under SORNA
to include the information described in Sec. 72.7(d) in the
information that a sex offender must provide to the jurisdictions
described in the actual clauses of section 20913(a)--i.e., those in
which he resides, is an employee, or is a student.
Third, the Court rejected an argument that Nichols was required to
inform Kansas of his intended departure based on 34 U.S.C.
20914(a)(3)'s direction to sex offenders to provide information about
where they ``will reside.'' The Court noted that ``Sec. [20]914(a)
merely lists the pieces of information that a sex offender must provide
if and when he updates his registration; it says nothing about whether
the offender has an obligation to update his registration in the first
place.'' 136 S. Ct. at 1118. In context, the Court's point was that
section 20914(a)(3) just specifies a type of information sex offenders
must provide, and does not say when they must provide it, so section
20914(a)(3) does not in itself require sex offenders to provide change
of residence information in advance when they leave a jurisdiction. For
example, without more, section 20914(a)(3) might be taken to entail
that sex offenders must advise where they ``will reside'' when
initially registering before release from imprisonment, see 34 U.S.C.
20913(b)(1), but not necessarily that they give advance notice to their
registration jurisdictions of expected future residence on subsequent
relocations.
However, this understanding of section 20914(a)(3) does not imply
any limitation on the Attorney General's authority to require a sex
offender to ``update his registration in the first place,'' Nichols,
136 S. Ct. at 1118, on the basis of 34 U.S.C. 20914(c), which directs
that ``[a] sex offender shall provide and update information required
under subsection (a) . . . in conformity with any time and manner
requirements prescribed by the Attorney General.'' Nor does it imply
any limitation on the Attorney General's authority under SORNA to
require sex offenders to report the full range of information described
in Sec. 72.7(d). In Sec. 72.7(d), as discussed above, the Attorney
General exercises these authorities to require sex offenders to inform
jurisdictions of intended departure and expected future residence prior
to any termination of residence in a jurisdiction.
Finally, the Court in Nichols rejected an argument that Nichols had
to notify Kansas of his departure on the theory that he engaged in two
changes of residence--the first when he abandoned his residence in
Kansas, and the second when he checked into a hotel in the Philippines.
136 S. Ct. at 1118-19. Section 72.7(d) in this rule, however, does not
assume any such multiplicity in changes of residence. Rather, it
establishes a freestanding requirement to inform registration
jurisdictions in advance of termination of residence and commencement
of intended future residence.
At the end of the Nichols decision, the Court noted that--
considering the International Megan's Law amendments to SORNA--``[o]ur
interpretation of the SORNA provisions at issue in this case in no way
means that sex offenders will be able to escape punishment for leaving
the United States without notifying the jurisdictions in which they
lived while in this country.'' 136 S. Ct. at 1119. The Court noted the
addition of a new subsection (b) to 18 U.S.C. 2250, which
``criminalized the `knowin[g] fail[ure] to provide information required
by [SORNA] relating to intended travel in foreign commerce,' '' and the
addition of 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7), which requires sex offenders to
provide information about intended international travel. 136 S. Ct. at
1119 (brackets in original) (quoting 18 U.S.C. 2250(b)(2)). The Court
concluded: ``We are thus reassured that our holding today is not likely
to create `loopholes and deficiencies' in SORNA's nationwide sex-
offender registration scheme.'' Id. (quoting United States v.
Kebodeaux, 570 U.S. 387, 399 (2013)).
Section 72.7(d) in this rule similarly helps to ensure that the
interpretation of 34 U.S.C. 20913(c) in Nichols and Lunsford does not
create ``loopholes and deficiencies'' in the operation of SORNA's
tracking system, in relation to both domestic and international
relocations. For example, consider a sex offender who terminates his
residence in a state without informing the state. Suppose the sex
offender is later found elsewhere in the United States, but he cannot
be shown to have taken up residence--or to have been employed or a
student--in another jurisdiction after leaving the original state of
residence. In light of Nichols, section 20913(c) does not require the
sex offender to report his relocation to the original state because it
is no longer an ``involved'' jurisdiction after he leaves, and there
may be no other relevant jurisdiction in which he must report the
change, i.e., one in which he presently resides, is employed, or is a
student. However,
[[Page 69880]]
with Sec. 72.7(d) in effect, a sex offender in this circumstance will
have violated 34 U.S.C. 20914(a) and (c)'s requirements to provide
registration information, including ``[a]ny other information''
prescribed by the Attorney General, in the time and manner prescribed
by the Attorney General. At a minimum, in the case described, the sex
offender would have failed to provide the information that he is
terminating his residence in the original state of residence prior to
his termination of residence in that state, contravening Sec. 72.7(d).
Hence, Sec. 72.7(d) provides an additional safeguard against
registered sex offenders simply disappearing without informing anyone
about their relocation. The consequences for noncompliant sex offenders
include potential prosecution by registration jurisdictions, which have
been encouraged to adopt departure notification requirements similar to
Sec. 72.7(d) in their registration laws by the Attorney General's
prior articulation of those requirements in the SORNA Guidelines. See
73 FR at 38065-66. The consequences of noncompliance with Sec. 72.7(d)
will also include potential Federal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 2250
for violations committed under circumstances supporting Federal
jurisdiction.
Sex offenders must comply both with the requirements of Sec.
72.7(c) and with the requirements of Sec. 72.7(d). For example,
suppose a sex offender changes residence from State A to State B. It is
not sufficient if (i) the sex offender complies with Sec. 72.7(d) by
telling State A that he is leaving and going to State B, but (ii) he
fails to appear in State B and register there as required by Sec.
72.7(c), and then (iii) he attempts to excuse his failure to comply
with Sec. 72.7(c) on the ground that State A could have told State B
about his relocation. Likewise, it is not sufficient if the sex
offender in such a case (i) complies with Sec. 72.7(c) by registering
in State B, but (ii) he fails to inform State A about the intended
relocation prior to his departure, and then (iii) he attempts to excuse
his failure to comply with Sec. 72.7(d) on the ground that State B
could have told State A about his relocation. As discussed above,
appearance and registration by sex offenders in jurisdictions in which
they commence residence, employment, or school attendance, as required
by Sec. 72.7(c), and notification by sex offenders to jurisdictions in
which they terminate residence, employment, or school attendance, as
required by Sec. 72.7(d), both serve important purposes in SORNA's
registration system as articulated in this rule and the previously
issued SORNA guidelines. Compliance with both requirements is necessary
to the seamless and effective operation of that system for the reasons
explained above.
Paragraph (e)--Reporting of Changes in Information Relating to Remote
Communication Identifiers, Temporary Lodging, and Vehicles
Paragraph (e) requires sex offenders to report to their residence
jurisdictions within three business days changes in remote
communication identifier information, temporary lodging information,
and vehicle information. In terms of legal authority, as discussed
earlier, these requirements are supportable on the basis of the
Attorney General's authority to interpret and implement SORNA's
requirement to keep the registration current, the Attorney General's
authority to expand the information that sex offenders must provide to
registration jurisdictions, and the Attorney General's authority to
prescribe the time and manner for providing and updating registration
information. See 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(a), 20914(a)(8), (c),
20916(b); 73 FR at 38066; 76 FR at 1637. (The SORNA Guidelines state
that such changes are to be reported ``immediately'' and explain at an
earlier point that ``immediately'' in the context of SORNA's timing
requirements means within three business days, see 73 FR at 38060,
38066.) SORNA does not require that these changes be reported through
in-person appearances and they may be reported by any means allowed by
registration jurisdictions in their discretion. See id. at 38067.
Paragraph (f)--Reporting of International Travel
Paragraph (f) of Sec. 72.7 requires sex offenders to report
intended travel outside of the United States to their residence
jurisdictions. The expected travel must be reported at least 21 days in
advance and, if applicable, prior to any termination of residence in
the jurisdiction. Reporting of information about intended international
travel is an express SORNA requirement following SORNA's amendment by
International Megan's Law. See 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7); Public Law 114-
119, sec. 6(a). The underlying reasons for requiring reporting of
international travel are explained above in connection with Sec.
72.6(d) of this rule.
The 21-day advance notice requirement is designed to provide
relevant agencies, including the U.S. Marshals Service and INTERPOL
Washington-U.S. National Central Bureau, sufficient lead time for any
investigation or inquiry that may be warranted relating to the sex
offender's international travel, and for notification of U.S. and
foreign authorities in destination countries, prior to the sex
offender's arrival in a destination country. The requirement that the
intended international travel be reported prior to any termination of
residence in the jurisdiction--potentially an issue in cases in which
the sex offender is terminating his U.S. residence and relocating to a
foreign country--ensures that a SORNA violation has occurred in case of
noncompliance while the sex offender is still residing in the
jurisdiction and hence required by 34 U.S.C. 20913(a) to register and
keep the registration current in that jurisdiction. The requirement to
report intended international travel at least 21 days in advance
applies in relation to all international travel, including both cases
in which the sex offender is temporarily traveling abroad while
maintaining a domestic residence and cases in which the sex offender is
terminating his residence in the particular jurisdiction or the United
States.
The rule recognizes, however, that reporting of intended
international travel 21 days in advance is not possible in some
circumstances. Section 72.8(a)(2) of the rule generally addresses
situations in which sex offenders cannot comply with SORNA requirements
because of circumstances beyond their control, and it specifically
addresses inability to comply with the timeframe for reporting of
international travel in Example 3 in that provision.
In terms of legal authority, the requirement to report intended
international travel to the residence jurisdiction at least 21 days in
advance and prior to any termination of residence is supportable as an
exercise of the express authority of the Attorney General under 34
U.S.C. 20914(c), which states in part that ``[a] sex offender shall
provide and update . . . information relating to intended travel
outside the United States . . . in conformity with any time and manner
requirements prescribed by the Attorney General.'' As discussed above,
the international travel reporting requirement, including its
associated timeframe requirement, is also supportable on the basis of
other SORNA authorities of the Attorney General, which were relied on
in SORNA guidelines preceding the addition of 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(7),
(c) by International Megan's Law. These authorities include the
Attorney General's authority under 34 U.S.C. 20914(a)(8) to expand the
range of
[[Page 69881]]
required registration information and the Attorney General's authority
under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b) to issue rules to interpret and implement
SORNA's requirement to keep the registration current.
Paragraph (g)--Compliance With Jurisdictions' Requirements for
Registering and Keeping the Registration Current
Paragraph (g) of Sec. 72.7 requires sex offenders to register and
keep the registration current in conformity with the time and manner
requirements of their registration jurisdictions, where they have not
done so in the time and manner normally required under SORNA.
SORNA generally requires sex offenders to register initially before
release from imprisonment or within three business days of sentencing,
but it recognizes that sex offenders may be unable to comply with these
requirements in some circumstances. The difficulty can arise in cases
in which a jurisdiction has no provision for registering certain sex
offenders as required by SORNA at the time of their release--or even no
registration program at all at that time--but the jurisdiction can
register them later as it progresses in its implementation of SORNA's
requirements. The SORNA Guidelines provide guidance to registration
jurisdictions about integrating previously excluded sex offenders into
their registration programs in such circumstances and ensuring that
these sex offenders fully comply with SORNA's requirements. See 73 FR
at 38063-64; see also Smith, 538 U.S. 84 (application of new sex
offender registration requirements to previously convicted sex
offenders does not violate the constitutional prohibition on ex post
facto laws).
Because the normal timeframe for initial registration under SORNA
may be past in these situations, SORNA authorizes the Attorney General
to prescribe rules for registration. Specifically, 34 U.S.C. 20913(d)
gives the Attorney General the authority to specify the applicability
of SORNA's requirements to sex offenders with pre-SORNA or pre-SORNA-
implementation convictions, ``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'' SORNA's initial registration
requirements. More broadly, as discussed above, the Attorney General's
general authority under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b) to interpret and implement
SORNA includes the authority to fill gaps in SORNA's time and manner
requirements for registering and keeping the registration current, and
34 U.S.C. 20914(c) expressly requires sex offenders to provide and
update registration information required by SORNA in the time and
manner prescribed by the Attorney General.
In section 72.7(g) in this rule, the Attorney General exercises his
authorities under 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(d), and 20914(c) to require
sex offenders to register and keep their registrations current in the
time and manner specified by their registration jurisdictions, where
the sex offenders have not registered or kept the registrations up to
date in the time and manner normally required by SORNA as articulated
in the earlier portions of Sec. 72.7. This requirement complements the
directions to registration jurisdictions in the SORNA Guidelines about
integrating previously excluded sex offenders and previously omitted
SORNA requirements into their registration programs, with suitable
timeframes and procedures, as the jurisdictions progress with SORNA
implementation. See 73 FR at 38063-64. Of course sex offenders are
independently required by the laws of their registration jurisdictions
to comply with the jurisdictions' time and manner specifications for
registering and updating their registrations. The effect of Sec.
72.7(g) is to adopt the jurisdictions' time and manner specifications
as SORNA requirements in the situations it covers.
Section 72.7(g)(1) includes four examples. The first example
concerns a situation in which a state does not register sex offenders
before release, but a sex offender can register soon after release in
conformity with the state's procedures. The second example concerns a
situation in which a jurisdiction does not register certain sex
offenders at all at the time of their release or entry into the
jurisdiction, but a sex offender in the excluded class becomes able to
register at a later time and is directed by the jurisdiction to do so
after it extends its registration requirements.
As the Supreme Court noted in Reynolds, SORNA, in section 20913(b),
``says that a sex offender must register before completing his prison
term, but the provision says nothing about when a pre-Act offender who
completed his prison term pre-Act must register. . . . Pre-Act
offenders . . . might, on their own, reach different conclusions about
whether, or how, the new registration requirements applied to them. A
ruling from the Attorney General [under section 20913(d)], however,
could diminish or eliminate those uncertainties. . . .'' 565 U.S. at
441-42. In Sec. 72.7(g), the Attorney General exercises his
authorities under sections 20912(b), 20913(d), and 20914(c) to
``eliminate those uncertainties'' in conformity with Congress's intent
concerning the filling of ``potential lacunae'' in SORNA, 565 U.S. at
441-42. Section 72.7(g) fills the gaps in such cases by adopting the
timing rules and procedures of the relevant registration jurisdictions.
This applies in relation to sex offenders who do not register initially
in conformity with SORNA because they were convicted and released
before SORNA's enactment, as described by the Court in Reynolds, and in
relation to all other sex offenders who do not register in accordance
with the normal time and manner requirements under SORNA, e.g., because
of shortfalls in a jurisdictions' registration requirements that may
later be corrected or that allow registration in some variant way.
The third example in Sec. 72.7(g)(1) concerns a sex offender in a
jurisdiction that initially has no procedure for sex offenders to
periodically update registrations through verification appearances as
required by SORNA, but the jurisdiction later directs the sex offender
to do so after it incorporates this aspect of SORNA into its
registration program. Since the periodic verification appearances
required by 34 U.S.C. 20918 fall under SORNA's requirement to keep the
registration current and involve updating the registration information
required by SORNA, it is within the Attorney General's authority under
34 U.S.C. 20912(b) and 20914(c) to specify the time and manner for the
verifications where SORNA's verification requirement or normal
timeframes for verifications have not been followed. Section 72.7(g)(1)
directs sex offenders to comply with the jurisdiction's requirements
for periodic verification in such situations.
The fourth example in Sec. 72.7(g)(1) concerns a sex offender who
does not provide particular information within the time required by
SORNA because a jurisdiction's informational requirements fall short of
SORNA's requirements but are later brought into line. The example
illustrates the point by reference to email addresses. As provided in
Sec. 72.6(b), sex offenders must include this information when they
register and, as provided in Sec. 72.7(e), they must report any
subsequent changes within three business days. Where the normal
reporting time is past when a jurisdiction decides to include a type of
information in its sex offender registry,
[[Page 69882]]
Sec. 72.7(g)(1) requires sex offenders to comply with the
jurisdiction's directions to provide the information at a later time.
Section 72.7(g)(2) provides that, in a prosecution under 18 U.S.C.
2250, Sec. 72.7(g)(1) does not relieve a sex offender of the need to
show an inability to comply with SORNA as an affirmative defense to
liability. The situations described in Sec. 72.7(g)(1), which may
involve noncompliance with SORNA's requirements because of deficits in
registration jurisdictions' requirements or procedures, overlap with
situations in which a sex offender may have a defense under 18 U.S.C.
2250(c) because he was prevented from complying with SORNA by
circumstances beyond his control. However, the purpose and effect of
Sec. 72.7(g)(1) are to hold sex offenders to compliance with the
registration rules and procedures of registration jurisdictions in the
situations it covers. Section 72.7(g) does not, in any case, relieve
sex offenders of the obligation to comply fully with SORNA if able to
do so or shift the burden of proof to the government to establish that
a registration jurisdiction's procedures would have allowed a sex
offender to register or keep the registration current in conformity
with SORNA. Rather, the defense under 18 U.S.C. 2250(c) is an
affirmative defense, as that provision explicitly provides, and as
Sec. Sec. 72.7(g)(2) and 72.8(a)(2) in this rule reiterate.
Section 72.8--Liability for Violations
Section 72.8 of the rule explains the liability of sex offenders
for SORNA violations and limitations on that potential liability.
Paragraph (a)(1)--Offense
SORNA's criminal provision, 18 U.S.C. 2250, provides criminal
liability for sex offenders based on SORNA violations.
Section 72.8(a)(1)(i) in the rule refers to potential criminal
liability under 18 U.S.C. 2250(a). Section 2250(a) authorizes
imprisonment for up to 10 years based on a knowing failure to register
or update a registration as required by SORNA. Federal criminal
liability may result under this provision when the violation occurs
under circumstances supporting Federal jurisdiction as specified in the
statute. These jurisdictional circumstances include (i) violation of
SORNA by sex offenders convicted of sex offenses under Federal
(including military) law, the law of the District of Columbia, Indian
tribal law, or the law of a U.S. territory or possession; and (ii)
travel in interstate or foreign commerce or entering, leaving, or
residing in Indian country. Section 2250(a) reaches all types of SORNA
violations, including failure to register or keep the registration
current in each jurisdiction of residence, employment, or school
attendance, as required by 34 U.S.C. 20913; failure to provide or
update registration information required by 34 U.S.C. 20914; or failure
to appear periodically and verify the registration information, as
required by 34 U.S.C. 20918.
Section 72.8(a)(1)(ii) in the rule refers to potential criminal
liability under 18 U.S.C. 2250(b), which was added by International
Megan's Law. See Public Law 114-119, sec. 6(b). Section 2250(b) defines
an offense that specifically reaches violations of SORNA's
international travel reporting requirement. The provision authorizes
imprisonment for up to 10 years for a sex offender who (i) knowingly
fails to provide information required by SORNA relating to intended
travel in foreign commerce and (ii) ``engages or attempts to engage in
the intended travel in foreign commerce.'' The jurisdictional language
in section 2250(b) reaches cases in which the contemplated travel is
not carried out, in addition to those in which the sex offender does
travel abroad. For example, consider a sex offender who (i) purchases a
plane ticket to a foreign destination but (ii) fails to report the
intended international travel as required by SORNA and (iii) does not
actually leave the country because the unreported travel is detected by
the authorities who arrest him at the airport. The attempted travel in
foreign commerce provides a sufficient jurisdictional basis for Federal
prosecution under section 2250(b).
Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) in the rule explains the condition for
liability under 18 U.S.C. 2250(a)-(b) that the defendant ``knowingly''
fail to comply with a SORNA requirement. The ``knowingly'' limitation
ensures that sex offenders are not held liable under section 2250 for
violations of registration requirements they did not know about.
However, this does not require knowledge that the requirement is
imposed by SORNA. State sex offenders, for example, are likely to be
instructed in the registration process regarding many of the
registration requirements appearing in SORNA, which are widely
paralleled in state registration laws, such as the need to report
changes in residence, employment, internet identifiers, and vehicle
information; the need to report intended international travel; and the
need to appear periodically to update and verify registration
information. The acknowledgment forms obtained from sex offenders in
registration often provide a means of establishing their knowledge of
the registration requirements in later prosecutions for violations. See
76 FR at 1634-35, 1638. But sex offenders may not be informed that the
registration requirements they are subject to are imposed by a
particular Federal law, SORNA. This does not impugn the fairness or
propriety of holding sex offenders liable under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for
knowingly violating a registration requirement that is in fact imposed
by SORNA, so long as they are aware of an obligation from some source
to comply with the requirement. See, e.g., United States v. Elkins, 683
F.3d 1039, 1050 (9th Cir. 2012); United States v. Whaley, 577 F.3d 254,
261-62 (5th Cir. 2009). Section 72.8(a)(1)(iii) makes these points
about 18 U.S.C. 2250's knowledge requirement in the rule.
Paragraph (a)(2)--Defense
Subsection (c) of 18 U.S.C. 2250 provides an affirmative defense to
liability under certain conditions where uncontrollable circumstances
prevented a sex offender from complying with SORNA, so long as the sex
offender complied as soon as the preventing circumstances ceased.
Section 72.8(a)(2) in the rule reproduces this affirmative defense
provision and provides examples of its operation.
Registration is a reciprocal process, involving the provision of
registration information by sex offenders, and the registration
jurisdiction's acceptance of the information for inclusion in the sex
offender registry. The circumstances preventing compliance with SORNA
under section 2250(c) accordingly may be a registration jurisdiction's
failure or refusal to carry out the reciprocal role needed to effect
registration, or the updating of a registration, as required by SORNA.
Example 1 in Sec. 72.8(a)(2) illustrates this type of situation,
describing a case in which a sex offender cannot appear and report an
inter-jurisdictional change of residence within three business days
because the office with which he needs to register will not meet with
him for a week. The case implicates both 34 U.S.C. 20913(a)'s
requirement that a sex offender register in each jurisdiction in which
he resides and 34 U.S.C. 20913(c)'s requirement that sex offenders
report changes of residence within three business days. These
provisions' net effect is that a sex offender establishing residence in
a new jurisdiction must register there but with a three-business-day
grace period. In the
[[Page 69883]]
case described, 18 U.S.C. 2250(c) would excuse the failure to report
within the three-business-day timeframe. However, the inability to meet
section 20913(c)'s specific timeframe does not obviate the need to
comply with section 20913(a)'s requirement to register in each state of
residence. Nothing prevents the sex offender from complying with this
registration requirement once the office is willing to meet with him,
so he will need to appear and carry out the registration at the
appointed time in order to have the benefit of the 18 U.S.C. 2250(c)
defense.
Example 2 in Sec. 72.8(a)(2) also illustrates a situation in which
the circumstance preventing compliance with SORNA is a failure by the
registration jurisdiction to carry out a necessary reciprocal role. The
specific situation described in the example is a state's refusal to
register sex offenders based on the offense for which the sex offender
was convicted. For example, SORNA requires registration based on
conviction for child pornography possession offenses, see 34 U.S.C.
20911(7)(G), but some states that have not fully implemented SORNA's
requirements in their registration programs may be unwilling to
register a sex offender on the basis of such an offense. Section
2250(c)'s excuse of the failure to register terminates if the state
subsequently becomes willing to register the sex offender, because the
circumstance preventing compliance with SORNA no longer exists.
However, liability based on a continuing failure by the sex offender to
comply with SORNA in such a case--following a change in state policy or
practice allowing compliance--depends on the sex offender's becoming
aware of the change since, as discussed above, 18 U.S.C. 2250 does not
impose liability for violation of unknown registration obligations. Cf.
73 FR at 38063-64 (direction to registration jurisdictions to instruct
sex offenders about new or additional registration duties in connection
with SORNA implementation).
Example 3 in Sec. 72.8(a)(2) describes a situation in which the
circumstance preventing compliance with SORNA relates to the situation
of the sex offender rather than the registration jurisdiction. The
second sentence of Sec. 72.7(f) in the rule requires in part that a
sex offender report intended international travel 21 days in advance,
which he cannot do if he does not anticipate a trip abroad that far in
advance. In such a case, as described in the example, 18 U.S.C. 2250(c)
would excuse a sex offender's failure to report the travel 21 days in
advance. Cf. 76 FR at 1638 (``[R]equiring 21 days advance notice may
occasionally be unnecessary or inappropriate. For example, a sex
offender may need to travel abroad unexpectedly because of a family or
work emergency.''). However, inability to comply with the 21-day
timeframe in a particular case does not prevent a sex offender from
otherwise complying with SORNA's requirements to inform the residence
jurisdiction about intended international travel, appearing in 34
U.S.C. 20914(a)(7) and in Sec. Sec. 72.6(d) and 72.7(f) in this rule.
Hence, once the intention to travel exists, the sex offender must
inform the registration jurisdiction to avoid liability under 18 U.S.C.
2250.
Paragraph (b)--Supervision Condition
Section 72.8(b) recounts that, for sex offenders convicted of
Federal offenses, compliance with SORNA is a mandatory condition of
probation and supervised release. See 18 U.S.C. 3563(a)(8), 3583(d)
(third sentence). Violation of this condition may result in revocation
of release. See 18 U.S.C. 3565(a)(2), 3583(e)(3). Section 72.8(b) also
notes that compliance with SORNA is a mandatory condition of parole for
sex offenders convicted of Federal offenses, see 18 U.S.C. 4209(a)
(second sentence), a requirement of narrow application given the
abolition of parole in Federal cases, except for offenses committed
before November 1, 1987.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Attorney General, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this regulation and by approving it
certifies that this regulation will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities for the purposes of
that Act because the regulation only articulates SORNA's registration
requirements for sex offenders.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563--Regulatory Planning and Review
This regulation has been drafted and reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' section
1(b), Principles of Regulation, and Executive Order 13563, ``Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review.'' The regulation expands part 72 of
title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations to provide a concise and
comprehensive statement of what sex offenders must do to comply with
SORNA's requirements, following express requirements appearing in SORNA
and previous exercises of authority SORNA grants to the Attorney
General to interpret and implement SORNA. The justification of these
requirements as means of furthering SORNA's objectives is explained in
the preamble to this regulation and in previous SORNA-related
documents, including the rulemaking entitled ``Applicability of the Sex
Offender Registration and Notification Act,'' 75 FR 81849 (final rule),
72 FR 8894 (interim rule); the SORNA Guidelines, 73 FR 38030; and the
SORNA Supplemental Guidelines, 76 FR 1630. The Office of Management and
Budget has determined that this rule is a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), and accordingly
this rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
The Department of Justice expects that the rule will not entail new
costs and will result in a number of benefits. For registration
jurisdictions, there are no new costs because their requirements under
SORNA continue to be those articulated in the previously issued SORNA
guidelines. Likewise, for sex offenders, the requirements articulated
in the rule either appear expressly in SORNA or have previously been
articulated by the Attorney General in the SORNA guidelines. The
procedures by which sex offenders register will continue to depend on
the registration processes of the jurisdictions that register them,
which will not be made more time-consuming or expensive or otherwise
changed by this rule.
In terms of benefits, the rule will provide in one place a clear,
concise, and comprehensive statement of sex offenders' registration
requirements under SORNA. This will reduce any expenditure by sex
offenders of time or money required for inquiry with state or Federal
authorities or others to resolve uncertainties, or required in
attempting to comply with perceived registration requirements under
SORNA that go beyond the requirements the Attorney General has actually
specified. The clarity provided by this rule will make it easier for
sex offenders to determine what SORNA requires them to do and thereby
facilitate compliance with SORNA.
There are also expected benefits for the government. As the
preamble explains, the rule's comprehensive articulation of SORNA's
registration requirements in regulations addressed to sex offenders
will provide a secure basis for Federal prosecution of knowing
violations of any of SORNA's requirements. It will resolve specific
problems that have arisen in past litigation or can be expected to
arise in future litigation if not clarified and resolved by this rule,
thereby avoiding
[[Page 69884]]
the expenditure of litigation resources on these matters. As discussed
in the preamble, previously or potentially litigated matters this rule
elucidates include such issues as the starting point and duration of
registration periods under SORNA, the applicability of SORNA's
requirements to all sex offenders regardless of when they were
convicted, the particular jurisdictions in which sex offenders are
required to report changes in registration information, the requirement
that relocating sex offenders notify a registration jurisdiction prior
to departure, the time frame for reporting intended international
travel, the mens rea (state of mind) requirement for violation of
SORNA's criminal provision (18 U.S.C. 2250), and the contours of the
impossibility defense under that provision.
As explained in the existing SORNA guidelines, SORNA aims to
prevent the commission of sex offenses, and to bring the perpetrators
of such offenses to justice more speedily and reliably, by enabling the
authorities to better identify, track, and monitor released sex
offenders and by informing the public regarding the presence of
released sex offenders in the community. See 73 FR at 38044-45. Hence,
by facilitating the enforcement of, and compliance with, SORNA's
registration requirements, and enhancing the basis for public
notification, the rule is expected to further SORNA's public safety
objectives and reduce the time and resources required in achieving
these objectives.
Executive Order 13132--Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the
states, on the relationship between the national Government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. There has been substantial consultation
with state officials regarding the interpretation and implementation of
SORNA. The previously issued SORNA Guidelines and SORNA Supplemental
Guidelines articulate the requirements for implementation of the SORNA
standards by states and other jurisdictions in their sex offender
registration and notification programs, requirements that are not
changed by this regulation's provision of a separate statement of the
registration obligations of sex offenders under SORNA. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 13132, it is determined that this rule
does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a federalism assessment.
Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform
This regulation meets the applicable standards set forth in section
3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule will not result in the expenditure by state, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed
necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995. This rule adds provisions to part 72 of title 28 of the Code of
Federal Regulations that articulate SORNA's registration requirements
for sex offenders, including where, when, and how long sex offenders
must register, what information they must provide, and how they must
keep their registrations current. The Attorney General has previously
addressed these matters and has resolved them in the same way in the
SORNA Guidelines, appearing at 73 FR 38030, and in the SORNA
Supplemental Guidelines, appearing at 76 FR 1630. Those previously
issued sets of guidelines determine what state, local, and tribal
jurisdictions must do to achieve substantial implementation of the
SORNA standards in their registration programs. Reiteration of some of
these requirements in a concise set of directions to sex offenders in
this rule will not change what jurisdictions need to do to implement
SORNA or affect their costs in doing so.
Congressional Review Act
This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by the Congressional
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The Department of Justice will submit the
report required by 5 U.S.C. 801 to each House of Congress and the
Comptroller General.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 72
Crime, Information, Law enforcement, Prisoners, Prisons, Probation
and parole, Records.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, amend chapter
I of title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations by revising part 72 to
read as follows:
PART 72--SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION AND NOTIFICATION
Sec.
72.1 Purpose.
72.2 Definitions.
72.3 Applicability of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification
Act.
72.4 Where sex offenders must register.
72.5 How long sex offenders must register.
72.6 Information sex offenders must provide.
72.7 How sex offenders must register and keep the registration
current.
72.8 Liability for violations.
Authority: 34 U.S.C. 20901-45; Pub. L. 109-248, 120 Stat. 587;
Pub. L. 114-119, 130 Stat. 15.
Sec. 72.1 Purpose.
(a) This part specifies the registration requirements of the Sex
Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), 34 U.S.C. 20901 et
seq., and the scope of those requirements' application. The Attorney
General has the authority to specify the requirements of SORNA and
their applicability as provided in this part pursuant to provisions of
SORNA, including 34 U.S.C. 20912(b), 20913(d), and 20914(a)(8), (c).
(b) This part does not preempt or limit any obligations of or
requirements relating to sex offenders under other Federal laws, rules,
or policies, or under the laws, rules, or policies of registration
jurisdictions or other entities. States and other governmental entities
may prescribe registration requirements and other requirements, with
which sex offenders must comply, that are more extensive or stringent
than those prescribed by SORNA.
Sec. 72.2 Definitions.
All terms used in this part have the same meaning as in SORNA.
Sec. 72.3 Applicability of the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act.
The requirements of SORNA apply to all sex offenders. All sex
offenders must comply with all requirements of that Act, regardless of
when the conviction of the offense for which registration is required
occurred (including if the conviction occurred before the enactment of
that Act), regardless of whether a jurisdiction in which registration
is required has substantially implemented that Act's requirements or
has implemented any particular requirement of that Act, and regardless
of whether any particular requirement or class of sex offenders is
mentioned in examples in this regulation or in other regulations or
guidelines issued by the Attorney General.
Example 1 to Sec. 72.3. A sex offender is federally convicted of
aggravated sexual abuse under 18 U.S.C. 2241 in 1990 and is released
following imprisonment in 2009. The sex offender is subject to the
requirements of SORNA and could be held criminally liable under 18
U.S.C. 2250 for failing to register or keep the registration current in
any jurisdiction
[[Page 69885]]
in which the sex offender resides, is an employee, or is a student.
Example 2 to Sec. 72.3. A sex offender is convicted by a state
jurisdiction in 1997 for molesting a child and is released following
imprisonment in 2000. The sex offender initially registers as required
but relocates to another state in 2009 and fails to register in the new
state of residence. The sex offender has violated the requirement under
SORNA to register in any jurisdiction in which he resides, and could be
held criminally liable under 18 U.S.C. 2250 for the violation because
he traveled in interstate commerce.
Sec. 72.4 Where sex offenders must register.
A sex offender must register, and keep the registration current, in
each jurisdiction in which the offender resides, is an employee, or is
a student. For initial registration purposes only, a sex offender must
also register in the jurisdiction in which convicted if that
jurisdiction is different from the jurisdiction of residence.
Sec. 72.5 How long sex offenders must register.
(a) Duration. A sex offender has a continuing obligation to
register and keep the registration current (except when the sex
offender is in custody or civilly committed) for the following periods
of time:
(1) 15 years, if the offender is a tier I sex offender;
(2) 25 years, if the offender is a tier II sex offender; and
(3) The life of the offender, if the offender is a tier III sex
offender.
(b) Commencement. The registration period begins to run:
(1) When a sex offender is released from imprisonment following
conviction for the offense giving rise to the registration requirement,
including in cases in which the term of imprisonment is based wholly or
in part on the sex offender's conviction for another offense; or
(2) If the sex offender is not sentenced to imprisonment, when the
sex offender is sentenced for the offense giving rise to the
registration requirement.
(c) Reduction. If a tier I sex offender has maintained for 10 years
a clean record, as described in 34 U.S.C. 20915(b)(1), the period for
which the sex offender must register and keep the registration current
under paragraph (a) of this section is reduced by 5 years. If a tier
III sex offender required to register on the basis of a juvenile
delinquency adjudication has maintained a clean record, as described in
34 U.S.C. 20915(b)(1), for 25 years, the period for which the sex
offender must register and keep the registration current under
paragraph (a) of this section is reduced to the period for which the
clean record has been maintained.
Sec. 72.6 Information sex offenders must provide.
Sex offenders must provide the following information for inclusion
in the sex offender registries of the jurisdictions in which they are
required to register:
(a) Name, date of birth, and Social Security number. (1) The name
of the sex offender, including any alias used by the sex offender.
(2) The sex offender's date of birth and any date that the sex
offender uses as his purported date of birth.
(3) The Social Security number of the sex offender and any number
that the sex offender uses as his purported Social Security number.
(b) Remote communication identifiers. All designations the sex
offender uses for purposes of routing or self-identification in
internet or telephonic communications or postings, including email
addresses and telephone numbers.
(c) Residence, temporary lodging, employment, and school
attendance. (1) The address of each residence at which the sex offender
resides or will reside or, if the sex offender has no present or
expected residence address, other information describing where the sex
offender resides or will reside with whatever definiteness is possible
under the circumstances.
(2) Information about any place in which the sex offender is
staying when away from his residence for seven or more days, including
the identity of the place and the period of time the sex offender is
staying there.
(3) The name and address of any place where the sex offender is or
will be an employee or, if the sex offender is or will be employed but
with no fixed place of employment, other information describing where
the sex offender works or will work with whatever definiteness is
possible under the circumstances.
(4) The name and address of any place where the sex offender is a
student or will be a student.
(d) International travel. Information relating to intended travel
outside the United States, including any anticipated itinerary, dates
and places of departure from, arrival in, or return to the United
States and each country visited, carrier and flight numbers for air
travel, destination country or countries and address or other contact
information therein, and means and purpose of travel.
(e) Passports and immigration documents. Information about each
passport the sex offender has and, if the sex offender is an alien,
information about any document or documents establishing the sex
offender's immigration status, including passport or immigration
document type and number.
(f) Vehicle information. The license plate number and a description
of any vehicle owned or operated by the sex offender, including
watercraft and aircraft in addition to land vehicles. If 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. Information must also be provided as to where any vehicle
owned or operated by the sex offender is habitually parked, docked, or
otherwise kept.
(g) Professional licenses. Information concerning all licensing of
the sex offender that authorizes the sex offender to engage in an
occupation or carry out a trade or business.
Sec. 72.7 How sex offenders must register and keep the registration
current.
(a) Initial registration--(1) In general. Except as provided in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section, a sex offender must register before
release from imprisonment following conviction for the offense giving
rise to the registration requirement, or, if the sex offender is not
sentenced to imprisonment, within three business days after being
sentenced for that offense.
(2) Special rules for certain cases. The following special
requirements apply:
(i) Federal and military offenders. A sex offender who is released
from Federal or military custody, or who is convicted for a Federal or
military sex offense but not sentenced to imprisonment, must register
within three business days of entering or remaining in a jurisdiction
to reside following the release or sentencing.
(ii) Foreign convictions. A sex offender required to register on
the basis of a conviction in a foreign country must register within
three business days of entering any jurisdiction in the United States
to reside, work, or attend school.
(b) Periodic in-person verification. A sex offender must appear in
person, allow the jurisdiction to take a current photograph, and verify
the information in each registry in which the offender is required to
register. In carrying out the required verification of information in
each registry, the sex offender must correct any information that has
changed or is otherwise inaccurate and must report any new registration
information. A sex offender must appear
[[Page 69886]]
in person for these purposes not less frequently than--
(1) Each year, if the offender is a tier I sex offender;
(2) Every six months, if the offender is a tier II sex offender;
and
(3) Every three months, if the offender is a tier III sex offender.
(c) Reporting of initiation and changes concerning name, residence,
employment, and school attendance. A sex offender who enters a
jurisdiction to reside, or who resides in a jurisdiction and changes
his name or his place of residence in the jurisdiction, must appear in
person in that jurisdiction and register or update the registration
within three business days. A sex offender who commences employment or
school attendance in a jurisdiction, or who changes employer, school
attended, or place of employment or school attendance in a
jurisdiction, must appear in person in that jurisdiction and register
or update the registration within three business days.
(d) Reporting of departure and termination concerning residence,
employment, and school attendance. (1) A sex offender residing in a
jurisdiction must inform that jurisdiction (by whatever means the
jurisdiction allows) if the sex offender will be commencing residence,
employment, or school attendance in another jurisdiction or outside of
the United States. The sex offender must so inform the jurisdiction in
which he is residing prior to any termination of residence in that
jurisdiction and prior to commencing residence, employment, or school
attendance in the other jurisdiction or outside of the United States.
(2) A sex offender who will be terminating residence, employment,
or school attendance in a jurisdiction must so inform that jurisdiction
(by whatever means the jurisdiction allows) prior to the termination of
residence, employment, or school attendance in the jurisdiction.
(e) Reporting of changes in information relating to remote
communication identifiers, temporary lodging, and vehicles. A sex
offender must report within three business days to his residence
jurisdiction (by whatever means the jurisdiction allows) any change in
remote communication identifier information, as described in Sec.
72.6(b), temporary lodging information, as described in Sec.
72.6(c)(2), and any change in vehicle information, as described in
Sec. 72.6(f).
(f) Reporting of international travel. A sex offender must report
intended travel outside the United States, including the information
described in Sec. 72.6(d), to his residence jurisdiction (by whatever
means the jurisdiction allows). The sex offender must report the travel
information to the jurisdiction at least 21 days in advance of the
intended travel and, if the sex offender is terminating his residence
in the jurisdiction, prior to his termination of residence in the
jurisdiction.
(g) Compliance with jurisdictions' requirements for registering and
keeping the registration current. (1) A sex offender who does not
comply with a requirement of SORNA in conformity with the time and
manner specifications of paragraphs (a) through (f) of this section
must comply with the requirement in conformity with any applicable time
and manner specifications of a jurisdiction in which the offender is
required to register.
Example 1 to paragraph (g)(1). A sex offender convicted in a state
does not initially register before release from imprisonment, as
required by 34 U.S.C. 20913(b)(1) and paragraph (a)(1) of this section,
because the state has no procedure for pre-release registration of sex
offenders. Instead, the state informs sex offenders that they must go
to a local police station within seven days of release to register. The
sex offender must comply with the state's requirements for initial
registration, i.e., the offender must report to the police station to
register within seven days of release.
Example 2 to paragraph (g)(1). A sex offender does not register
when he is released from custody, or does not register upon entering a
jurisdiction to reside as required by 34 U.S.C. 20913(c) and paragraph
(c) of this section, because the jurisdiction, at the time, does not
register sex offenders based on the offense for which he was convicted.
The jurisdiction later sends the sex offender a notice advising that it
has extended its registration requirements to include sex offenders
like him and directing him to report to a specified agency within 90
days to register. The sex offender must report to the agency to
register within the specified timeframe.
Example 3 to paragraph (g)(1). A sex offender registers as required
when released from imprisonment or upon entering a jurisdiction to
reside, but the jurisdiction has no procedure for sex offenders to
appear periodically in person to update and verify the registration
information as required by 34 U.S.C. 20918 and paragraph (b) of this
section. The jurisdiction later sends the sex offender a notice
advising that it has adopted a periodic verification requirement and
directing the sex offender to appear at a designated time and place for
an initial update meeting. The sex offender must appear and update the
registration as directed.
Example 4 to paragraph (g)(1). A sex offender does not report his
email address to the jurisdiction in which he resides when he initially
registers, or within three business days of a change as required by
paragraph (e) of this section, because email addresses are not among
the information the jurisdiction accepts for inclusion in its registry.
The jurisdiction later notifies the sex offender that it has extended
the registration information it collects to include email addresses and
directs him to send a reply within a specified time that provides his
current email address. The sex offender must comply with this
direction.
(2) In a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 2250, paragraph (g)(1) of this
section does not in any case relieve a sex offender of the need to
establish as an affirmative defense an inability to comply with SORNA
because of circumstances beyond his control as provided in 18 U.S.C.
2250(c) and Sec. 72.8(a)(2).
Sec. 72.8 Liability for violations.
(a) Criminal liability--(1) Offense. (i) A sex offender may be
liable to criminal penalties under 18 U.S.C. 2250(a) if the sex
offender--
(A) Is required to register under SORNA;
(B)(1) Is a sex offender as defined for the purposes of SORNA by
reason of a conviction under Federal law (including the Uniform Code of
Military Justice), the law of the District of Columbia, Indian tribal
law, or the law of any territory or possession of the United States; or
(2) Travels in interstate or foreign commerce, or enters or leaves,
or resides in, Indian country; and
(C) Knowingly fails to register or update a registration as
required by SORNA.
(ii) A sex offender may be liable to criminal penalties under 18
U.S.C. 2250(b) if the sex offender--
(A) Is required to register under SORNA;
(B) Knowingly fails to provide information required by SORNA
relating to intended travel in foreign commerce; and
(C) Engages or attempts to engage in the intended travel in foreign
commerce.
(iii) As a condition of liability under 18 U.S.C. 2250(a)-(b) for
failing to comply with a requirement of SORNA, a sex offender must have
been aware of the requirement he is charged with violating, but need
not have been aware
[[Page 69887]]
that the requirement is imposed by SORNA.
(2) Defense. A sex offender may have an affirmative defense to
liability, as provided in 18 U.S.C. 2250(c), if uncontrollable
circumstances prevented the sex offender from complying with SORNA,
where the sex offender did not contribute to the creation of those
circumstances in reckless disregard of the requirement to comply and
complied as soon as the circumstances preventing compliance ceased to
exist.
Example 1 to paragraph (a)(2). A sex offender changes residence
from one jurisdiction to another, bringing into play SORNA's
requirement to register in each jurisdiction where the sex offender
resides and SORNA's requirement to appear in person and report changes
of residence within three business days. See 34 U.S.C. 20913(a), (c).
The sex offender attempts to comply with these requirements by
contacting the local sheriff's office, which is responsible for sex
offender registration in the destination jurisdiction. The sheriff's
office advises that it cannot schedule an appointment for him to
register within three business days but that he should come by in a
week. The sex offender would have a defense to liability if he appeared
at the sheriff's office at the appointed time and registered as
required. The sex offender's temporary inability to register and
inability to report the change of residence within three business days
in the new residence jurisdiction was due to a circumstance beyond his
control--the sheriff office's refusal to meet with him until a week had
passed--and he complied with the requirement to register as soon as the
circumstance preventing compliance ceased to exist.
Example 2 to paragraph (a)(2). A sex offender cannot register in a
state in which he resides because its registration authorities will not
register offenders on the basis of the offense for which the sex
offender was convicted. The sex offender would have a defense to
liability because the state's unwillingness to register sex offenders
like him is a circumstance beyond his control. However, if the sex
offender failed to register after becoming aware of a change in state
policy or practice allowing his registration, the 18 U.S.C. 2250(c)
defense would no longer apply, because in such a case the circumstance
preventing compliance with the registration requirement would no longer
exist.
Example 3 to paragraph (a)(2). A sex offender needs to travel to a
foreign country on short notice--less than 21 days--because of an
unforeseeable family or work emergency. The sex offender would have a
defense to liability for failing to report the intended travel 21 days
in advance, as required by Sec. 72.7(f), because it is impossible to
report an intention to travel outside the United States before the
intention exists. However, if the sex offender failed to inform the
registration jurisdiction (albeit on short notice) once he intended to
travel, 18 U.S.C. 2250(c) would not excuse that failure, because the
preventing circumstance--absence of an intent to travel abroad--would
no longer exist.
(b) Supervision condition. For a sex offender convicted of a
Federal offense, compliance with SORNA is a mandatory condition of
probation, supervised release, and parole. The release of such an
offender who does not comply with SORNA may be revoked.
Dated: November 29, 2021.
Merrick B. Garland,
Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2021-26420 Filed 12-7-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P