It’s the 12 Days of Ballotpedia! Your gift powers the trusted, unbiased information voters need heading into 2026. Donate now!

Registration Requirements Under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act rule (2022)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
What is a significant rule?

Significant regulatory action is a term used to describe an agency rule that has had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. As part of its role in the regulatory review process, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines which rules meet this definition.


Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control
• Executive control
• Judicial control
•Legislative control
• Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.


The Registration Requirements Under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act rule is a significant rule issued by the Office of the Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) effective January 7, 2022, that defined registration requirements under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) and clarified the Attorney General's authority to implement SORNA's requirements. DOJ issued the rule pursuant to its authority under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006.[1]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • Name: Registration Requirements Under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act
  • Agency: Office of the Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)
  • Action: Final rule
  • Type of significant rule: Other significant rule

    • Timeline

    The following timeline details key rulemaking activity:

    Background

    SORNA—title I of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006— gave the Attorney General (AG) authority to require additional information that convicted sex offenders must offer when registering, and authorized the AG "to effectuate the legislative intent that SORNA apply to all sex offenders, regardless of when they were convicted," according to the rule. This rulemaking codified these duties of the AG, as well as other regulations that amended SORNA, such as requiring sex offenders report international travel. DOJ stated that policy in this rulemaking is not innovative and that it codified in DOJ procedures regulations set forth by SORNA and legislation that amended it.[1]

    Summary of the rule

    The following is a summary of the rule from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:

    “ 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.[1][3] ”

    Summary of provisions

    The following is a summary of the provisions from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:[1]

    “

    Many of the requirements it articulates reflect 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 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.[3]

    		”

    Significant impact

    See also: Significant regulatory action

    Executive Order 12866, issued by President Bill Clinton (D) in 1993, directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to determine which agency rules qualify as significant rules and thus are subject to OMB review.

    Significant rules have had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. Executive Order 12866 further defined an economically significant rule as a significant rule with an associated economic impact of $100 million or more. Executive Order 14094, issued by President Joe Biden (D) on April 6, 2023, made changes to Executive Order 12866, including referring to economically significant rules as section 3(f)(1) significant rules and raising the monetary threshold for economic significance to $200 million or more.[1]


    The text of the Registration Requirements Under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act rule states that OMB deemed this rule significant, but not economically significant:

    “ 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.[3] ”

    Text of the rule

    The full text of the rule is available below:[1]

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 Federal Register, "Registration Requirements Under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act," December 19, 2023.
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Federal Register, "Registration Requirements Under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act," December 19, 2023.
    3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    v • e
    The Administrative State
    MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
    Pillars
    Reporting
    Laws
    Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    Cases
    Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
    Terms
    Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
    Bibliography
    Agencies
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Registration_Requirements_Under_the_Sex_Offender_Registration_and_Notification_Act_rule_(2022)&oldid=10691781"