When mountain runner Michelino Sunseri climbed and descended Grand Teton in document time final September, he posted details about his route on social media. Based on the Nationwide Park Service (NPS) and the Justice Division, Sunseri thereby implicated himself in a federal misdemeanor punishable by as much as six months in jail.
Though the NPS later reconsidered its advice that Sunseri needs to be prosecuted for his seemingly inadvertent use of an unapproved path, the U.S. Lawyer’s Workplace in Wyoming tried Sunseri anyway. Two members of the Home Judiciary Committee just lately decried that baffling determination, saying it “seems to be a chief instance of the issue of overcriminalization”—an issue that President Donald Trump is avowedly eager to handle.
Sunseri’s bench trial concluded on Might 21, and U.S. Justice of the Peace Decide Stephanie Hambrick has not introduced her verdict but. However Reps. Harriet Hageman (R–Wyo.) and Andy Biggs (R–Ariz.) need to know why federal prosecutors determined to pursue the case, particularly in gentle of Trump’s Might 9 government order urging restraint in deploying prison penalties for regulatory violations.
That order expressed concern about “technical and unintentional regulatory violations which will expose people to prison penalties for conduct they didn’t know was prohibited,” Hageman and Biggs famous final week in a letter to Stephanie Sprecher, the appearing U.S. lawyer for Wyoming. “President Trump instructed all federal prosecutors to prioritize civil and administrative treatments over prison enforcement the place conduct was unintentional, non-harmful, or gained no benefit.”
The truth that Sunseri marketed his route strongly suggests he didn’t understand he was breaking the legislation. And as WyoFile famous after Sunseri’s trial, the trail that the NPS stated he shouldn’t have taken, generally known as “the previous climber’s path,” is “a historic path so well-used that it is change into a thin singletrack.”
Actually, Cato Institute authorized fellow Mike Fox notes, “document holders earlier than Sunseri had used the identical path, and tour guides who cost hefty sums continuously lead hikers up the identical route. Solely two tiny and ambiguous indicators inform the general public that the path is off-limits.”
A type of indicators, on the prime of the path, stated “shortcutting causes erosion.” The opposite signal, on the backside of the path, stated “closed for regrowth.”
Ed Bushnell, one in every of Sunseri’s attorneys, argued that his shopper was not “shortcutting,” since he was utilizing a long-established path. Bushnell added that it was unclear whether or not the “closed” discover referred to the realm across the signal or the path past it.
“There is no such thing as a clear prohibition there,” Bushnell stated. “This isn’t conspicuous signage.”
After Sunseri was cited for utilizing a prohibited path, Hageman and Biggs say, he “took accountability for his actions, expressed remorse, and volunteered to assist formally shut the alternate path, which receives common foot site visitors.” The U.S. Lawyer’s Workplace filed prison expenses anyway.
The federal government’s subsequent plea-deal presents had been onerous given the character of Sunseri’s violation. In a Might 19 electronic mail, Frank Lands, deputy director for operations on the NPS, described a type of proposals, which entailed a superb mixed with a five-year ban from Grand Teton Nationwide Park, as “overcriminalization primarily based on the gravity of the offense.”
The NPS “is withdrawing its prison prosecution referral,” Lands wrote. However that didn’t faze federal prosecutors.
Hageman and Biggs need to know why. They requested Sprecher for “all paperwork and communications” relating to that call, “the quantity of taxpayer funding and division assets” dedicated to Sunseri’s prosecution, instances that the U.S. Lawyer’s Workplace has declined to prosecute since bringing expenses towards Sunseri, and some other steps the workplace has taken to adjust to Trump’s order.
Sunseri’s case illustrates the traps set by a code of federal rules so huge and obscure that even consultants can solely guess on the variety of prison penalties it authorizes—not less than 300,000, they assume. Whereas tackling that thicket of prohibitions is a frightening process, the least federal prosecutors can do within the meantime is train some common sense discretion.
© Copyright 2025 by Creators Syndicate Inc.
