"Sex, Cells, and SORNA: Applying Sex Offender Registration Laws to Sexting Cases"

The title of this post is the title of this new student note by Stephanie Gaylord Forbes appearing in the William and Mary Law Review.  Here is a snippet from the introduction:

Sexting, a combination of the words “sex” and “texting,” has sparked a national debate regarding the appropriate response to the trend.  Partially fueling this debate is the concern that, presuming the pictures involved in sexting offenses meet the state’s statutory definition of child pornography, persons engaging in sexting are subject to prosecution under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (Adam Walsh Act) and the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA).  SORNA requires registration if the sexual offense is “comparable to or more severe than” specified offenses, yet it provides no guidance as to whom makes this determination.

This Note will argue that the determination of whether a sexting offense passes the comparison test is a question of fact that a jury should decide.  Part I will provide background information on the sexting debate.  Part II will explain the statutory requirements of the Adam Walsh Act and SORNA.  Part III will address the application of SORNA to sexting cases, and Part IV will argue that the comparison test involves a question of fact that a jury should determine at trial.