Federal Judiciary

Dean's remaining argument is that the Attorney General's rule that SORNA applied retroactively did not comply with the requirements of the APA. Dean does not dispute that SORNA would apply to him if the rule making it retroactive is valid. Whether the Attorney General had good cause to bypass the notice and comment requirements of the APA is an issue of first impression in this Court and one that has split our sister circuits. See United States v. Gould, 568 F.3d 459 (4th Cir.2009), cert. denied,-S. Ct. -, 2010 WL 680575 (2010); United States v. Cain, 583 F.3d 408 (6th Cir.2009). . . . We conclude that the public safety argument advanced by the Attorney General is good cause for bypassing the notice and comment period.

Full post as published by Split Circuits on April 29, 2010 (boomark / email).