Facts of the Case
Herman Avery Gundy was convicted of committing sexual assault in Maryland while on supervised release for a prior federal offense. After serving his sentence for the Maryland sex offense, Gundy was to be transferred to federal custody to serve his sentence for violating his supervised release. As a part of this transfer, Gundy received permission to travel unsupervised by bus from Pennsylvania to New York. Gundy made the trip, but did not register as a sex offender in either Maryland or New York as required by state law.
In January 2013, Gundy was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 2250, the Sex Offender Notification and Registration Act (SORNA), for traveling from Pennsylvania to New York and then staying in New York without registering as a sex offender. He was convicted and sentenced to time served, along with five years of supervised release.
The 2nd Circuit affirmed this judgment on appeal. Gundy then asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review his case, which it agreed to do only as to the question of whether SORNA unlawfully delegates authority to the U.S. Attorney General under 42 U.S.C. § 16913 to impose the law’s registration requirements upon offenders who were convicted before the statute was enacted.
Questions
Does the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act’s delegation of authority to the U.S. Attorney General to issue regulations under 42 U.S.C. § 16913 violate the nondelegation doctrine?
Conclusions
-
The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA)’s delegation of authority to the U.S. Attorney General to issue regulations under 42 U.S.C. § 16913 does not violate the nondelegation doctrine. Justice Elena Kagan authored an opinion for the four-justice plurality.
The plurality first noted that the Court had previously interpreted this provision of SORNA in Reynolds v. United States, 565 U.S. 432 (2012), to require the attorney general to apply SORNA to all pre-Act offenders as soon as feasible. In light of this prior interpretation and the context of the provision and the statutory purpose, the plurality found unpersuasive Gundy’s argument that the provision gives the attorney general discretion to do whatever he wants as to pre-Act offenders. The nondelegation doctrine holds that Congress may not transfer to another branch “powers which are strictly and exclusively legislative” but may delegate on executive agencies discretion to implement and enforce laws, so long as Congress has provided an “intelligible principle” to which the agency must conform. The Court’s decision in Reynolds makes clear that § 16913(d) contains an “intelligible principle”—namely, that the attorney general apply SORNA to all pre-Act offenders as soon as possible—and thus the provision does not violate the nondelegation doctrine. The plurality also noted that no attorney general has used the provision in a more expansive way.
Justice Samuel Alito concurred in the judgment, expressing that he would like to revisit the Court’s approach to nondelegation. However, under the Court’s present jurisprudence, he finds no reason to invalidate SORNA’s delegation of authority in this provision.
Justice Neil Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion in which Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Clarence Thomas joined. Unlike Justice Alito, the dissent would use this case to change its approach to the nondelegation doctrine. The dissent expresses concern that SORNA gives the attorney general “the power to write his own criminal code governing the lives of a half-million citizens.”
Justice Brett Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Return of the National Nanny or Restoration of the Cop on the Beat: The FTC’s Impending Proposed Rule on Commercial Surveillance
The FTC has adopted an expansive rulemaking agenda. A recently finalized rule banning noncompete agreements...
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Sides with Government in Nondelegation Case
In Robinhood Financial LLC v. Secretary of Commonwealth, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court sided...
A Trio of "Sleeper" Nondelegation Doctrine Challenges
For those, like me, who harbor hopes that abuses of authority by administrative agencies might...
Revitalizing the Nondelegation Doctrine
Federalist Society Review, Volume 23
A Review of The Administrative State Before the Supreme Court: Perspectives on the Nondelegation Doctrine (Peter...
Assessing the Nondelegation Challenge in Texas’s Keystone XL Pipeline Lawsuit Against the Biden Administration
Justice Alito’s concurrence in the recent case of Gundy v. United States signaled that the...
Assessing the Nondelegation Challenge in Texas’s Keystone XL Pipeline Lawsuit Against the Biden Administration
Justice Alito’s concurrence in the recent case of Gundy v. United States signaled that the...
An Empty Attack on the Nondelegation Doctrine
Since 2019, a majority of the current Supreme Court has expressed interest in revitalizing the...
An Empty Attack on the Nondelegation Doctrine
Since 2019, a majority of the current Supreme Court has expressed interest in revitalizing the...
Bureaucracy With Bumper Guards: Better Than It Rules?
Federalist Society Review, Volume 22
A review of Law & Leviathan: Redeeming the Administrative State, by Cass Sunstein & Adrian...
State Court Docket Watch: Midwest Institute of Health, PLLC v. Governor of Michigan
State Court Docket Watch: 2020 Edition
In the wake of Michigan’s first positive tests for the coronavirus, Governor Gretchen Whitmer declared...
State Court Docket Watch: Midwest Institute of Health, PLLC v. Governor of Michigan
State Court Docket Watch: 2020 Edition
In the wake of Michigan’s first positive tests for the coronavirus, Governor Gretchen Whitmer declared...
As Far As Reasonably Practicable: Reimagining the Role of Congress in Agency Rulemaking
Federalist Society Review, Volume 21
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
A Nondelegation Implementing Rule
Following the denial of certiorari in Paul v. United States, five Justices appear interested in...
A Nondelegation Implementing Rule
Following the denial of certiorari in Paul v. United States, five Justices appear interested in...
An Imagined Bloc and Other Figments
Federalist Society Review, Volume 21
A review of American Justice 2019: The Roberts Court Arrives, by Mark Joseph Stern (University...
An Imagined Bloc and Other Figments
Federalist Society Review, Volume 21
A review of American Justice 2019: The Roberts Court Arrives, by Mark Joseph Stern (University...
Is Our Modern Administrative State Unmoored from the Morality of Law?
Federalist Society Review, Volume 21
A review of The Dubious Morality of Modern Administrative Law, by Richard A. Epstein (Manhattan Institute...
Nondelegation After Gundy
NLC Convention Panel: Administrative Law & Regulation Practice Group
While the Supreme Court repeatedly has proclaimed that Congress cannot delegate its law-making power, in...
Nondelegation After Gundy
NLC Convention Panel: Administrative Law & Regulation Practice Group
While the Supreme Court repeatedly has proclaimed that Congress cannot delegate its law-making power, in...
Deep Dive Episode 79 – An Update on Gundy v. United States
Regulatory Transparency Project's Fourth Branch Podcast
Last term in Gundy v. U.S., without Justice Kavanaugh the Court was split between a...
Litigation Update: Gundy v. U.S.
Last term in Gundy v. U.S., without Justice Kavanaugh the Court was split between a...
Deep Dive Episode 61 – Gundy v. United States: Revisiting the Nondelegation Doctrine, or Not?
Regulatory Transparency Project's Fourth Branch Podcast
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Gundy v. United States disappointed some observers who were hoping...
Deep Dive Episode 61 – Gundy v. United States: Revisiting the Nondelegation Doctrine, or Not?
Regulatory Transparency Project's Fourth Branch Podcast
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Gundy v. United States disappointed some observers who were hoping...
Gundy v. United States: Revisiting the Nondelegation Doctrine, or Not?
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Gundy v. United States disappointed some observers who were hoping...
Federalist Society Review, Volume 19
Federalist Society Review, Volume 19
The Federalist Society Review is the legal journal produced by the Federalist Society’s Practice Groups....
Can and Should the Federal Judiciary Rein In Our Expansive Administrative State?
Federalist Society Review, Volume 20
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
Necessary & Proper Episode 29: Is the Nondelegation Doctrine Really Dead?
On October 4, the Georgetown Chapter held an event titled "Is the Nondelegation Doctrine Really...
Courthouse Steps Oral Argument: Gundy v. United States
Criminal Law & Procedure, Federal Separation of Powers, Administrative Law, and Regulatory Transparency Project Teleforum
Since 1789, the Supreme Court has struck down only two laws on “nondelegation” grounds, both...
Courthouse Steps Preview: Gundy v. United States
On October 2, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Gundy v. United States. In...
Maintaining the Constitution's Separation of Powers
On Tuesday, October 1, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Gundy v. United...
Maintaining the Constitution's Separation of Powers
On Tuesday, October 1, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Gundy v. United...
Party Like It’s 1935?: Gundy v. United States and the Future of the Non-Delegation Doctrine
Federalist Society Review, Volume 19
Note from the Editor: This article discusses Gundy v. United States, a case involving the...
Party Like It’s 1935?: Gundy v. United States and the Future of the Non-Delegation Doctrine
Federalist Society Review, Volume 19
Note from the Editor: This article discusses Gundy v. United States, a case involving the...
Reinvigorating the Non-Delegation Doctrine
Madison Lawyers Chapter
Madison Club5 East Wilson Street
Madison, WI 53703
Is the Nondelegation Doctrine Really Dead?: A Post-argument Discussion of Gundy v. United States
Georgetown Student Chapter
Georgetown Law - McDonough 140600 New Jersey Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20001