Lexplug logoLexplug

United States v. Kebodeaux

Supreme Court of the United States
570 U.S. 387, 186 L. Ed. 2d 540, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 4715 (2013)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

The Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress the power to enact and retroactively apply sex offender registration requirements to a federal offender who was already subject to a similar federal registration scheme at the time of their conviction, even after the offender has completed their sentence and been released from custody.


Facts:

  • In 1999, Anthony Kebodeaux, while a member of the United States Air Force, was convicted by a special court-martial of a sex offense.
  • Kebodeaux served a three-month prison sentence and received a bad-conduct discharge.
  • After his release, Kebodeaux moved to Texas.
  • In 2004, Kebodeaux registered as a sex offender with Texas state authorities, as required by state law.
  • In 2007, Kebodeaux moved from San Antonio to El Paso and properly updated his sex offender registration.
  • Later in 2007, Kebodeaux moved back to San Antonio but failed to update his registration within the timeframe required by the newly enacted federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA).

Procedural Posture:

  • The Federal Government prosecuted Anthony Kebodeaux in a Federal District Court for failing to update his sex offender registration as required by SORNA.
  • The District Court convicted Kebodeaux.
  • Kebodeaux, as appellant, appealed his conviction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
  • A three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit affirmed the conviction.
  • The Fifth Circuit then heard the case en banc and, reversing the panel, reversed the conviction, holding that Congress lacked the constitutional power to apply SORNA to Kebodeaux.
  • The United States, as petitioner, sought and was granted a writ of certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does the Necessary and Proper Clause grant Congress the power to enact the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) and apply its registration requirements to a former member of the military who had already completed his sentence for a sex offense before SORNA was enacted?


Opinions:

Majority - Justice Breyer

Yes. The Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress the power to apply SORNA's registration requirements to Kebodeaux because he was not unconditionally released from federal authority. The appellate court's conclusion was based on the flawed premise that Kebodeaux was free of any federal obligation upon release. In fact, at the time of his conviction, Kebodeaux was subject to the registration requirements of the federal Wetterling Act. Congress's power to regulate the military (Art. I, § 8, cl. 14) along with the Necessary and Proper Clause provides the authority to create the Uniform Code of Military Justice, punish crimes under it, and impose post-release conditions such as registration. SORNA is merely a constitutionally permissible modification and update of this pre-existing federal registration scheme, designed to make the national system more uniform and effective.


Concurring - Chief Justice Roberts

Yes. Congress had the power under the Military Regulation and Necessary and Proper Clauses to require Kebodeaux to register. This power stems from Congress's authority to impose consequences on members of the military who violate military law; the registration requirement acts as a deterrent. The majority's additional reasoning about general public safety benefits is irrelevant and dangerously suggests a general federal police power, which the Constitution does not grant. The constitutional basis for the law here is narrow and tied directly to the power to regulate the armed forces.


Concurring - Justice Alito

Yes. The registration requirement is a necessary and proper exercise of Congress's power to regulate the armed forces. When the military prosecutes a service member for a sex offense that a state could have prosecuted, it creates a potential gap in the state's sex offender registration system. Because the exercise of federal military jurisdiction creates this public safety risk, Congress has the concomitant power under the Necessary and Proper Clause to enact legislation to mitigate that risk, such as by requiring federal registration.


Dissenting - Justice Scalia

No. The application of SORNA's registration requirement to Kebodeaux is not a valid exercise of federal power. The majority's reasoning is flawed because it assumes without sufficient basis that the original Wetterling Act was a valid exercise of federal power. Furthermore, SORNA is not designed to carry the Wetterling Act into execution, but is a separate legislative scheme. The chain of legislative authority is broken, and the law cannot be justified under the Necessary and Proper Clause.


Dissenting - Justice Thomas

No. As applied to Kebodeaux, SORNA does not carry into execution any enumerated federal power and instead usurps the general police power reserved to the States. The Constitution creates a federal government of limited powers, and protecting the public from sex offenders is a classic state police power function. Kebodeaux had long been a civilian, completely released from federal custody, so Congress's power to regulate the military no longer applied to him. The majority's reliance on the pre-existing Wetterling Act is an invalid bootstrapping argument; Congress cannot justify a new law based on a prior law that was also enacted merely through its incidental authority.



Analysis:

This decision affirms Congress's broad authority under the Necessary and Proper Clause when tethered to an enumerated power, such as military regulation. The ruling establishes that a pre-existing federal obligation can serve as a constitutional anchor for subsequent federal legislation, even after an individual is no longer in federal custody. However, the separate concurrences reveal significant judicial concern about the potential for this reasoning to expand federal authority into a general police power, a role traditionally reserved for the states. The case leaves unresolved whether SORNA would be constitutional as applied to a federal offender who was not subject to any federal registration requirement at the time of their release.

G

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: United States v. Kebodeaux (2013)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"