International Megan's Law and the Identifier Provision - An Efficacy Analysis
Daniel Cull · Open Scholarship Institutional Repository (Washington University in St. Louis) · 2018
Act encouraged states to establish registration and tracking standards.2 The federal government then passed federal Megan's Law in 1996.3 Megan's Law required states to "release relevant information that is necessary to protect the public concerning a specific person required to register."4 All fifty U.S. States and all U.S. territories responded by enacting local laws to meet these requirements.5 Soon after, the federal government passed the Pam Lychner Sex Offender Tracking and Identification Act of 1996 (hereinafter "Lychner Act").6 The Lychner Act required the FBI to establish a national database to track convicted sex offenders against minors, convicted sexually violent sexual offenders, and sexually violent predators.7 Mirroring Megan's Law, the Lychner Act empowered the FBI to "release relevant information concerning a person required to register . . .that is necessary to protect the public."8 In 2006, the federal government passed the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (hereinafter "SORNA").9 SORNA acted to create "a comprehensive national system for the registration of. . .offenders". 10 SORNA sought to standardize state registration and notification to settle "gaps and problems with existing Federal and State laws."11 Strangely, the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, 2.This was done through statutory notification requirements which were better facilitated through a registration framework.Specifically, any person required to register had to inform the State law enforcement agency of the jurisdiction where they resided.See Wetterling Act § 14071(b)(4).If that person changed their residence out-of-state, then the previous jurisdiction's law enforcement agency would inform the new state's law enforcement agency, provided that both states had a registration requirement.Id. § 14071(b)(5).The registrant himself or herself also had to notify the new state of their new address, provided the new state had a registration requirement.Id.The registrant had ten days to do this after moving.See id.(amended 1997).Failure to do so created criminal liability in each state with registration requirements.Id. § 14071(d).This registration framework provided multiple avenues for tracking sex offenders.Because there were multiple avenues for tracking, the system was more robust, and it was more difficult for registrants to slip through the system.3. Megan's Law, Pub.L. No. 104-145, 110 Stat.1345 (1996).4.Id. § 2. 5. See 162 CONG.REC.H390 (daily ed.Feb. 1, 2016) (statement of Rep. Smith) ("Today all 50 States and all U.S. territories have a Megan's Law.Because of this law, parents, guardians, universities, school officials, sports coaches, law enforcement, and the public at large are now empowered with the critical information they need to mitigate harm to children.").6. Pam Lychner Sexual Offender Tracking and Identification Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-236, 110 Stat.3093. 7.Id. § 2(a).8.