<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/skins/common/feed.css?303"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
		<id>https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Blog%3ACase_Reviews%2FU.S._Supreme_Court_06-27-11</id>
		<title>Blog:Case Reviews/U.S. Supreme Court 06-27-11 - Revision history</title>
		<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Blog%3ACase_Reviews%2FU.S._Supreme_Court_06-27-11"/>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?title=Blog:Case_Reviews/U.S._Supreme_Court_06-27-11&amp;action=history"/>
		<updated>2026-05-30T03:15:18Z</updated>
		<subtitle>Revision history for this page on the wiki</subtitle>
		<generator>MediaWiki 1.19.24</generator>

	<entry>
		<id>https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?title=Blog:Case_Reviews/U.S._Supreme_Court_06-27-11&amp;diff=7946&amp;oldid=prev</id>
		<title>Maintenance script: Importing text file</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?title=Blog:Case_Reviews/U.S._Supreme_Court_06-27-11&amp;diff=7946&amp;oldid=prev"/>
				<updated>2012-12-21T00:23:45Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Importing text file&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;New page&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div&gt;''Read the full article for details about the following new cases:''&lt;br /&gt;
* Court Vacates 9th Circuit SORNA Decision&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In a ''per curiam'' [http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/062711zor.pdf disposition available here] (scroll to the bottom), the Court vacates the Ninth Circuit's decision in ''United'' ''States v. Juvenile Male'' on mootness grounds. Although the Ninth Circuit had concluded that the SORNA provision requiring registration of juvenile offenders was unconstitutional on ''ex post facto'' grounds,&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''[a]t the time of the Ninth Circuit's decision in this case, the District Court's order of juvenile supervision had expired, and respondent was no longer subject to the sex offender-registration conditions that he sought to challenge on appeal.As a result, respondent's challenge was moot before the Ninth Circuit unless he could &amp;quot;show that a decision invalidating&amp;quot; the District Court's order would likely redress some collateral consequence of the registration conditions.''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This result was prompted, in large part, by the Montana Supreme Court's certification that JM's continuing duty to register under state law was not contingent upon the continuing validity of the SORNA requirements.&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/062711zor.pdf ''United'' ''States v. Juvenile Male'']&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{wl-publish: 2011-06-26 21:00:00 -0700 | grapkoch }}&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Maintenance script</name></author>	</entry>

	</feed>