And the holding was apparently based upon Commerce Clause grounds. Sentencing Law & Policy is covering the story. Like Berman, I couldn't find the opinion (the District of Montana's website has a link for opinions that is under construction). Here is a media account of the decision:
A federal judge in Missoula this week ruled that a provision of the national Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act is unconstitutional and dismissed a felony indictment accusing one sex offender of failing to register in Montana.
In a 44-page opinion issued Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Donald W. Molloy ruled that Congress cannot federally criminalize a sex offender's failure to register in a state-run database. Congress therefore exceeded its authority under the Interstate Commerce Clause by making it a federal crime for a sex offender to travel to another state and fail to re-register in that jurisdiction, Molloy wrote.
Jessica T. Fehr, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Montana, said the government intends to appeal the decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals....
In his order, Molloy dismissed the indictment without prejudice, ruling that the provision “would allow Congress to federalize nearly any local criminal offense simply by making it a crime for someone who committed the offense to travel in interstate commerce at some point in his life.”
Because Molloy dismissed the indictment “without prejudice,” federal prosecutors can re-allege the charges against Waybright if they find another legal hook to do so.
Federal defender John Rhodes of Missoula filed the motions to dismiss the indictment, asserting seven different legal grounds that he argued during a hearing earlier this month.
Molloy denied a majority of those arguments, but ruled in favor of Rhodes' assertion that Congress overreached its authority and violated the Interstate Commerce Clause.
As was apparent the last time a district court ruled this way, this is a very controversial ruling. As I've championed this argument for a while, I'm happy to see another district court on board. This decision means the 9th Circuit will join the 11th Circuit in having to evaluate this argument. And it only takes 2 circuits to form a split.
Finally some voice of reason! Are we going to continue to punish citizens of the United States, Voting, taxpaying citizens? When does the Scarlett Letter End?
Posted by: steve | June 16, 2008 at 02:43 PM