Might this holding snippet (below) resolve the issue of whether registrants who move out of states that fail to remove them from the registry, and are not required to register in their new State, nonetheless continue to be “Registrants” in for SORNA/IML purposes?

We have had questions here on this from people who have left Florida long ago, for example, and are not presently required to register in their new jurisdiction -and whether on the basis of Florida continuing to list them they might nonetheless be considered to still be “registrants” under SORNA. This holding snippet would appear to resolve that in favor of not falling under the category of “registrant” for the purpose of federal IML and the Notice of Travel provision.

“The Government resists [this] straightforward reading of the statutory text, arguing instead that once an offender registers in a jurisdiction, “that jurisdiction necessarily remains ‘involved pursuant to subsection (a),’ because the offender continues to appear on its registry as a current resident.” Brief for United States 24. But §16913(a) lists only three possibilities for an “involved” jurisdiction: “where the offender resides, where the offender is an employee, and where the offender is a student.” Notably absent is “where the offender appears on a registry.” We decline the Government’s invitation to add an extra clause to the text of §16913(a). As we long ago remarked in another context, “[w]hat the government asks is not a construction of a statute, but, in effect, an enlargement of it by the court, so that what was omitted, presumably by inadvertence, may be included within its scope. To supply omissions transcends the judicial function.” Iselin v. United States, 270 U. S. 245, 251 (1926) . Just so here.”

I misspoke -meant to say that * under IML* covered sex offender means having a sex conviction plus being actively registered in any jurisdiction on the basis of living, studying, or working. Instead I said under SORNA at the top of my reply.

“Covered sex offender” by definition under SORNA requires both a sex conviction AND that the individual be currently required to register under the Sex Offender Reg program of any jurisdiction (I.e., lives, works, studies). The latter condition is not met by your hypothetical so I would say in this example the two conditions aren’t met and thus the person would not be required to provide notice even if his term of registration according to his federal tier hasn’t elapsed.

However, the two conditions may possibly be met to trigger this Notification provision in IML if the individual moves to a state in which he would have to register and he still hasn’t met the minimum SORNA term of registration per his particular SORNA (Federal) tier.

That’s what SORNA says in my plain language reading of it.

Always best to check with an attorney with experience in this area though ..

What if he’s no longer required to register, but in a non-SORNA-compliant state? Must he then determine whether he “would” be required to register under SORNA?

That is the question in THIS thread that is also raised by Interested Party in above thread.

This is not true. The IML law says that you must currently be required to register under SORNA to be subject to prosecution for failure to provide this 21-day notice of intended travel. See above discussion from “Interested Party”.

Pay attention to the threads!

If I were to notify my residence state of Maryland of my travel plans, where my offense is not a covered offense, I’m afraid they might tell me to file the notice through Florida, which after all is where I’m listed because they never remove once listed. I’d be afraid that Florida would then update my listing with my current Maryland address..

In which case I’ll really have to decide if I’m willing to chance skipping this Notice step on the grounds that my Tier 1 term of federal registration has elapsed and this particular SORNA provision doesn’t apply to me as SORNA reads (the penalty provision for noncompliance is based on being required by SORNA to register).

You would report your travel to you county sheriff (or local registration office) where you live, regardless of your registration status, since federal law requires it, even if you are not required to register any more.

I’d wholeheartedly agree with you Jacob. Unfortunately the SMART.GOV FAQs page is singularly unhelpful, and I haven’t seen anywhere online where this particular issue is addressed.

I also agree that the threshold issue in determining if this IML provision applies to individuals with sex crimes convictions is whether they’re presently required by SORNA to register. If the answer is no, then I’d think this notice of travel requirement would not apply at the federal level, at least according to a plain language reading of this provision in the IML.

That provision requires a person to determine legally whether they “would” be required to register in a SORNA-compliant state.

Not a big deal in Florida (which is SORNA-compliant), but confusing for former registrants in the 32 non-SORNA compliant states. Do THOSE people each have to hire their own lawyer to determine whether they, individually, are required to provide Federal notification?

This must be an FAQ.

My specific question Was whether this specific FEDERAL Notice of travel requirement provision applies just to individuals required by FEDERAL SORNA to register. As we know, SORNA obligations apply separately from any State obligations. Once one’s SORNA term of registration expires due to the passage of time per one’s tier, then SORNA might no longer apply -not this particular Notice of Travel provision.

If one is not required at the State level to register, then presumably at that point there’d be no need to give notice of travel at the State level. But in theory if your registration term ends before the federal minimum standard for your tier level, you’d still owe the Feds this notice.

as written, it would certainly seem to not apply at the federal level if your federal registration term has elapsed per your tier.

As FAC stated above – Section 6 of IML (the “Notice of Travel” section – “Requirement That Sex Offenders Provide International Travel Related Information To Sex Offender Registries”) says, “Whoever–(1) is required to register under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (42 U.S.C. 16901 et seq.)… As such, the notice provision appears to only apply to those who are required to register under SORNA (federal requirement and not merely another jurisdiction).