SORNA Does Not Apply to Someone Who Only Traveled Interstate Before Effective Date of Statute

U.S. v. Husted, 2008 WL 4792339 (11/5/08) (Published) - A SORNA win for the defense. Under a plain language analysis, SORNA ("Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act") does not apply to someone who only traveled interstate before SORNA's effective date. One of the elements of SORNA [unless the person is convicted of a federal sex offense] is the person "travels" in interstate commerce. The present tense of that word and of the other related words in the statute, [e.g., enters, leaves resides], indicates travel that has not already occurred. So "travels" only refers to travel after SORNA's effective date. This does not lead to an absurd result, as the government claimed. Congress may have wished to avoid the ex post facto concern the defendant raised. The broad purpose to protect the public from evil sex offenders cannot create an ambiguity in a separate, specific portion of the statute where no ambiguity exists. Plus there is a presumption against retroactive application of a statute. Unclear legislative history couldn't overcome the plain statutory language.