United States v. Nichols
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1DissentGorsuch, Circuit Judge
A circuit split lingers here. First to approach the question, this circuit interpreted 42 U.S.C. § 16913 as requiring sex offenders to notify authorities if they plan to leave the country. United States v. Murphy, 664 F.3d 798, 801-02 (10th Cir.2011). In a later opinion the Eighth Circuit gave thoughtful consideration to this interpretation of the statute but came to the opposite view. United States v. Lunsford, 725 F.3d 859, 861-62 (8th Cir.2013); see also Murphy, 664 F.3d at 805 (Lucero, *668J., dissenting). In denying rehearing today to reconsider this court’s position in light of Lunsford’s…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Mistretta v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Yakus v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Whitman v. American Trucking Assns., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
- A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Panama Refining Co. v. RyanSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.