United States v. Bobby Springston, 480 F. App'x 860

This case is on remand after the Supreme Court; Springston was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 2250 for failing to register as a sex offender under SORNA.
We previously affirmed the conviction and vacated three supervised release conditions, remanding for resentencing.
The district court amended the judgment removing the vacated special conditions before certiorari was filed.
Supreme Court vacated our judgment and remanded for consideration in light of Reynolds v. United States, which held pre-Act offenders’ registration depends on AG regulation.
Springston, a pre-Act offender, argued the AG regulations and delegation to issue them were improper; Reynolds allows standing to challenge non-delegation.
This appeal asks whether the district court should reconsider the regulations’ validity under the non-delegation doctrine.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standing to challenge regulations	Springston has standing to challenge the regulations.	Zuniga/May dependencies deprive standing.	Springston has standing.
Non-delegation of regulatory authority	Delegation to AG violates non-delegation doctrine.	Delegation is constitutional or unresolved.	Merits must be considered; non-delegation claim to be addressed on remand.
Remand scope	Case should be remanded to proceed on non-delegation merits.	Existing indictment challenges remain unaltered.	Remand to address non-delegation; other indictment challenges rejected.

Reynolds v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 975 (Supreme Court 2012) (pre-Act offender registration requires AG specification by regulation)
United States v. May, 535 F.3d 912 (8th Cir. 2008) (registration applies from enactment date, pre-regulatory regime)
United States v. Fernandez, 671 F.3d 697 (8th Cir. 2012) (non-delegation standing per curiam decision)
United States v. Zuniga, 579 F.3d 845 (8th Cir. 2009) (standing rejected previously)