§ 16925. Failure of jurisdiction to comply

(a) In general

For any fiscal year after the end of the period for implementation, a jurisdiction that fails, as determined by the Attorney General, to substantially implement this subchapter shall not receive 10 percent of the funds that would otherwise be allocated for that fiscal year to the jurisdiction under subpart 1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3750 et seq.).

(b) State constitutionality

(1) In general

When evaluating whether a jurisdiction has substantially implemented this subchapter, the Attorney General shall consider whether the jurisdiction is unable to substantially implement this subchapter because of a demonstrated inability to implement certain provisions that would place the jurisdiction in violation of its constitution, as determined by a ruling of the jurisdiction’s highest court.

(2) Efforts

If the circumstances arise under paragraph (1), then the Attorney General and the jurisdiction shall make good faith efforts to accomplish substantial implementation of this subchapter and to reconcile any conflicts between this subchapter and the jurisdiction’s constitution. In considering whether compliance with the requirements of this subchapter would likely violate the jurisdiction’s constitution or an interpretation thereof by the jurisdiction’s highest court, the Attorney General shall consult with the chief executive and chief legal officer of the jurisdiction concerning the jurisdiction’s interpretation of the jurisdiction’s constitution and rulings thereon by the jurisdiction’s highest court.

(3) Alternative procedures

If the jurisdiction is unable to substantially implement this subchapter because of a limitation imposed by the jurisdiction’s constitution, the Attorney General may determine that the jurisdiction is in compliance with this chapter if the jurisdiction has made, or is in the process of implementing reasonable alternative procedures or accommodations, which are consistent with the purposes of this chapter.

(4) Funding reduction

If a jurisdiction does not comply with paragraph (3), then the jurisdiction shall be subject to a funding reduction as specified in subsection (a).

(c) Reallocation

Amounts not allocated under a program referred to in this section to a jurisdiction for failure to substantially implement this subchapter shall be reallocated under that program to jurisdictions that have not failed to substantially implement this subchapter or may be reallocated to a jurisdiction from which they were withheld to be used solely for the purpose of implementing this subchapter.

(d) Rule of construction

The provisions of this subchapter that are cast as directions to jurisdictions or their officials constitute, in relation to States, only conditions required to avoid the reduction of Federal funding under this section.

(Pub. L. 109–248, title I, § 125, July 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 598.)

References In Text

References in Text

This subchapter, referred to in text, was in the original “this title”, meaning title I of Pub. L. 109–248, July 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 590, known as the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. For complete classification of title I to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 16901 of this title and Tables.

The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, referred to in subsec. (a), is Pub. L. 90–351, June 19, 1968, 82 Stat. 197. Subpart 1 of part E of title I of the Act is classified generally to part A (§ 3750 et seq.) of subchapter V of chapter 46 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 3711 of this title and Tables.

This chapter, referred to in subsec. (b)(3), was in the original “this Act”, meaning Pub. L. 109–248, July 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 587, known as the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 16901 of this title and Tables.