ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings 2018: Mar 10: Berkeley, April 14: Los Angeles, May 12: San Diego [details]
CA Family Law Clinic: Feb 24 [details]

General News

Survey – International Travel after IML

If you have traveled to a foreign country after President Obama signed HR 515 / International Megan’s Law into law on February 8, 2016, please complete this survey to help gather details about the effects of this legislation. We will also share this data with the RTAG group for incorporation into their travel matrix. Thank you.

Go to International Travel Survey

Join the discussion

  1. Ron

    So, has anyone received a passport identifier yet? I am living as an expat and I am not required to register here. I am wondering if I will receive a passport identifier

    • Timmmy

      As long as you are not on any registry, you will not.

      • Sam

        He’s from Florida. They keep you on the list but don’t require him to continue registering. So it’s a difficult position to think about.

      • Rob

        Timmy, Is this a factual statement?
        That if you are not on the registry you will not receive the passport identifier? The wording of the bill seems to be very vague (to me) and states something to the effect of “anyone who is on the registry and has committed a crime against a child (anyone under 18) will get the unique identifier”
        Does this mean that if you’re on the registry but have not committed crime against a “child” you won’t get the identifier or is it everyone on the registry also if you are off the registry but your crime was against a child, will you still get the stamp?
        Maybe I have missed it but has this actually been established?

        • Paul

          “(c) Defined Terms.–In this section–
          “(1) the term `covered sex offender’ means an individual
          “(A) is a sex offender, as defined in section 4(f)
          of the International Megan’s Law to Prevent Child
          Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced
          Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders; and
          “(B) is currently required to register under the
          sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction;
          “(2) the term `unique identifier’ means any visual
          designation affixed to a conspicuous location on the passport
          indicating that the individual is a covered sex offender; and
          “(3) the term `passport’ means a passport book or passport

          The emphasis is on “and”. You must be both A, and B, to receive the unique identifier.

          The confusion will be, what about persons who previously resided in states such as Florida, North Carolina, and New York, who are no longer required to register in their current state of residence, BUT are still subject to the nonsense of their previous jurisdiction.

          Also, and I’ll just throw this out there given the wording is intentionally vague. But what about persons who have never resided in a state such as Florida, North Carolina, or New York; who only resided in a single state, and are no longer required to register in said state. Technically speaking, those persons are still “currently required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction”.

          I know that common sense implies that this section applies to persons currently required to register. BUT technically speaking, a person with specific convictions who has only ever resided in a single state, and is no longer required to register in said state, would still be “…required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction”. If said person wanted to travel to Florida for a period of time in excess of whatever their triggering date is, then they would technically be subject to the registration program of Florida.

          I know it’s a stretch, but rarely (if ever) does common sense prevail in these situations.

        • Rob

          Thanks for the response. So basically the government could go full a$$hole and put everyone who has committed a crime against a “child” on the passport stamp or any registrant for that matter. This is what happens when the law has been made in such a way without debate and being rushed through, sort of like the tax law.
          We don’t know what they even intended, I don’t think even the State department knew at first or the original author. Many what “if’s” guess we will have to wait for the issues to present themselves before we know what they really intend to do.

          What we do know is that there will be a lot of registrant’s who will have to deal with yet another draconian measure to degrade and humiliate them from our government. Very selfishly I hope, I will not get the stamp but I don’t think it would be fair for me not to and some others have to deal with a stamp. Compared to other states I’m lucky that I committed my crime in the state I currently reside in.

          – For example, if you are currently required to register and are relieved, will you be able to get a new passport without the stamp?
          – Will green notices still be sent out?

          I guess thats the real kicker, especially with all the various rules and vagueness in each state pertaining to registering laws that have come about because of no set uniform policy across the U.S. I guess are we always sex offenders, can we really ever escape the label?

          I have only lived in one state as a registrant due in part because I was afraid of what might happen if I moved to another state, would have to start my registration time over again and would I have to even register longer?
          I recently completed my 10 year registration in the state of Maine. While I actually really enjoy living in this state and would definitely retire here someday, I would also love to move and see the country but I’m afraid of what will happen. Will I be put on another states registration list and have to start all over after waiting for these last 10 years to past?
          There is no set guidelines for us, while that should be illegal, states do it and seem to get away with it. This whole Florida crap is beyond comprehension.
          I’m hoping to at least not have this stamp and be able to travel again, we shall see.
          I’m thankful for people like Janice who fights for us and has created this forum.

  2. Sam

    I’m still waiting on this as well. Are you stuck on a state registry too?

    • Ron

      I do not register any more, as I am not required to, but Florida still has my 10 year old information on their sex offender registry.

      • PK

        You should sue them.

      • Sam

        Florida makes me wonder about this law because they don’t take people off the registry even though they aren’t required to register anymore. New York on the other hand makes you check in every few years or any time you move or get a new email.

        • Paul

          I have to imagine the state would lose if sued. How can the laws of one state be applied to a person not physically present in that state? If that were the case, a person with a valid CCW could carry in any state he/she wishes by simply saying that they’re legit under the laws of the former State! It doesn’t make any sense!

          How the heck can NY mandate a person not in their state to do a damned thing?

        • Sam

          Very easily. They won doe v O’Donnell. Due to a lack of wording in the law it’s implied that they have power over you no matter what state or country you move to. Wisconsin has the same sort of thing but they charge you money as well.

          Right now I’m trying to see if I can be removed as my conviction didn’t originate in NY which was the deciding factor in doe v O’Donnell

        • Ron

          One more ingredient to throw into the soup is that my Adjudication was withheld. So, while I am a sex offender, I am not a felon. – although in reality I see little difference.

    • David

      Yes. My conviction and incarceration were in Florida, but I have now lived in a different state (California) since my release 17 years ago. So I’m sure I remain on Florida’s list.

  3. Covered

    Something that I think is being missed on this thread is changes in sex offender laws in various countries. Often we make plans for travel based only upon whether registrants will be allowed into the country, but there should be other considerations. Consider this fact: Poland is part of the EU and Schengen. Registrants can go there, but did you know that the harshest sex offender laws of Europe may be found in Poland since 2010. It is law in Poland that a sexual assault against a child under age 15, or in the case of incest, or repeated crimes, can be forcibly castrated. It is the only European country that allows this. Some others, like France, Spain, and Czech Republic allow for voluntary castration, but in Poland it can be forced. EVEN IF ONE HAS COMPLETED THEIR SENTENCE. Let’s say that an applicable registrant goes to Poland on vacation and gets arrested for some non-sex related crime (say getting into a fistfight in a pub), could that registrant be in danger of having this law applied against them? I don’t know, but I wouldn’t want to find out. Poland also has two SORegistries. One with limited accessibility and another one that is public (child related offenses would be on the public). Do you know the reporting requirements in Poland? I don’t. Here is a link about the castration law.
    I think we need a full workup of sex offender laws to go along with the RTAG information and other information that we glean from registrants reporting their travels. Foreign sex offender laws are in flux, and we need to know the risks before making travel decisions.

  4. International Traveler

    U.S. Customs/Border Control agents will now need to have reasonable suspicion of a crime before they search your electronic device:

    • Covered

      This makes not a bit of difference where registrants are concerned. In CPB and most other agencies of the government, registrants are already under suspicion of conducting illegal activity just because they are registrants. Even the change doesn’t matter. They can still inspect any international travelers electronic devices, and, if they find something they find suspicious, they can go the next step. This sounds more like an accommodation to the ACLU while they continue to expand searches of devices.

    • CR

      CBP will always claim to have “reasonable suspicion” of criminal activity on our part when we re-enter the country. That claim is explicitly incorporated into the Interpol Green Notice that is sent to every foreign country we travel to.

      I agree with the ACLU. The standard needs to be “probable cause”, not “reasonable suspicion”.

    • TS

      RCs should always expect to be having their electronic devices searched based upon the alleged nature of who they are when a green notice is sent in advance alleging why they are traveling with USG saying so and the US Courts saying it is ok for the USG to do that without basis. Send the phone home before you leave on your return trip.

      U.S. customs agents are searching more cellphones — including those belonging to Americans–including-those-belonging-to-americans/2018/01/05/0a236202-f247-11e7-b3bf-ab90a706e175_story.html?utm_term=.fac7078c8410

      Border inspections of electronic devices hits record high

      CBP Releases Updated Border Search of Electronic Device Directive and FY17 Statistics

      • David Kennerly, There But For the Grace Of Dog...

        “Send the phone home before you leave on your return trip.” This is what I used to do before I quit traveling. One thing, make sure that you do not volunteer that information to Customs when you are, inevitably, sent back to Secondary on your return trip. If they ask where all of your electronics are (as would happen to me) I simply told them that I traveled without them. For those items still in the process of being shipped back home, there is always the opportunity for CBP to intercept them. They have plenty of other people doing nothing but inspecting shipments coming into the country. Plus, you will have pissed them off by telling them of your end-run around their inspection.

        • TS

          @David K

          I should’ve attributed the “send phone home” to you as it was you who said it long ago. I was merely reiterating it for the masses. My apologies.

        • David Kennerly, There But For the Grace Of Dog...

          No problem. I’m sure that others have already independently hit on the solution. I really resented having to do this but could see no other choice. I would have to find a post office or FedEx, UPS, etc. on my last day of the trip when I would much rather be enjoying the country.

        • Tired Of Hiding

          I would recommend the following if you plan on attempting to even travel with these green notices sent out. If you do make it out when you return you will be taken to secondary…that is a given and always done. So knowing this you should travel with a cheap phone and not your regular phone. A phone with nothing on it at all and that is simple used while on the trip.

          Take a table for checking the web at internet cafes but which has nothing on it. A browser is all you need for checking web based email such as a gmail account.

          Cameras…these make them so happy going through your person photos in search of anything at all so take your camera and then FTP your data from the chips to the server of your choice and then reformat the chip (full format and not quick) so there is no data on the chip. Do take some photos of churches while you travel and keep those on a separate chip which you put into your camera prior to landing back in the USA. Nothing irritates them more than expecting to see naked photos and finding only churches.

          Best of luck and bon voyage!


        • Fresa

          So, even as tier 3 (victim under 13) offender you can still visit Greece and Italy? They don’t care about the green notice? Just trying to gather information to determine whether we will try to fly there on vacation.


        • James

          Yes, Fresa, that is my understanding.

          There are no promises of course, but if you stay out of Great Britain, all of Europe should be open to you.

          I might further add that you should do this now, if you can, if only because this might change. Take advantage of this opportunity.

          The level of your conviction does not matter….and that was your real question.

          Best Wishes, James

        • CR

          There are some unlocked smart phones available for as little as $130 (even $99 to Amazon Prime members, if you are willing to tolerate offers and ads). They may not be the best phones, but they are functional. You can do everything you need to do with them.

          Before your return trip home, upload everything to the cloud. If you don’t mind the privacy invasion, just bring the device back with you and let them search it. Or if that really bothers you (as it would me), just destroy the phone and discard it before you return.

          It’s insane that we have to even consider such things.

        • David Kennerly, A Jumped-Up Pantry Boy Who Never Knew His Place

          The Blu R1 HD was available for $50 from Amazon to Prime customers (all without a plan) but now appears to be $85. You can buy a prepaid SIM card when you arrive in whatever country along with some data which always seems to go far too quickly than sending and receiving a few emails and checking a few webpages would suggest. Of course, most hotels now have wifi and many offer it free these days. When travel is nearly done, stick it in a padded envelope and send it home. Much easier and cheaper than sending a laptop, a camera AND a phone back. I can’t throw anything away. Or bring it on through. I miss travel…

  5. CR

    I haven’t had occasion to go out of the country for the past couple of decades. When I do, I may take a cell phone and/or tablet with me, maybe even a cheap laptop or notebook computer, but nothing valuable or expensive. In some countries, it might be easier to simply buy whatever I need once I get there. Probably something cheap, as it might have to be disposable.

    I figure that anything of value on the device I can sync or upload to cloud storage before I return. Then I can leave the device in the foreign country with family or friends (maybe gift it or have them hold it for me for my next visit), wipe or reimage it and ship it back home, or wipe/reimage and carry it back with me.

    I’m thinking a wiped device might seem suspicious, so maybe better to take something cheap, and don’t bring it back. It may add a few hundred to the cost of a trip, but I would consider it worth it if it saved me the indignity of having my device searched upon reentry.

  6. E

    Advice, anyone?

    I’ve waited this long to book several trips to Europe for work this spring and summer. Should I book them? Keep waiting on a letter from State Dept?
    On another note: has anyone while visiting Schengen countries and after filing full itineraries with hotel names in AWA compliant states been visited by local cops at the hotels they listed?
    Geez what a screwed up situation.

    • David Kennerly, A Jumped-Up Pantry Boy Who Never Knew His Place

      Go ahead and book them. You will, almost certainly, be okay. I can’t imagine that the Western Europeans care enough to check on you at your hotel. Just remember: do NOT try to go to the U.K. or Ireland (The Republic of). They will not let you in and, if they were to be your arrival country from the States, they would send you straight back to the U.S.

    • David

      Hi E. Yes, I have recently gone to France for vacation. I had no problems entering France or returning to the US afterwards. It would be extremely unlikely for police in any European country to come looking for you at the hotel where you’re staying. For the most part, Europe simply doesn’t worry about registered citizens like the U.S.A. does.

    • Robert

      @E, I’m in Europe right now. No problems. US to Stockholm. Visited France, Italy, Sweden, Norway, Amsterdam no issues. Had alerts sent when I travel to Philippines but nothing for Europe.

    • E

      Thanks much. Just to confirm: I have been in Europe 3-4 times per year but my state didn’t require a “detailed itinerary” til now. New 2018 paperwork. Yeehaa. Have you guys been traveling AFTER submitting detailed itineraries including all flights and hotel info?

      I’ve never had to tell them what hotel or what friends I was staying with. I’m still not comfortable giving them the addresses of friends I might stay with. Kills me.

      • James

        Dear E:

        I hope and expect to make it twice to Europe this year…oddly, since I normally just wander, I think I will have actual addresses for part of my stays this year.

        My intention is only to give flight dates, outbound and return, and countries I expect to be in, not an actual itinerary with addresses etc.

        If they want more, I don’t intend to give it….under most any circumstances.

        I am in CA with a pretty (easy?{it is never easy inside myself!}) agency to register with…but we should know within a couple of months how this goes. I will report back regardless on how this works out.

        Best Wishes, James

      • David

        E, it’s David again. Yes, prior to my European trips, I have submitted detailed itineraries including the addresses of where I will be staying. My recent trip including one hotel for a couple days but primarily I was staying in private hosted rental unit. I lieu of a hotel name, I simply note “Private residence” or “Private apartment” on the itinerary. I do NOT indicate it as a short-term rental because that information is not required.

        • E

          Thanks @James and @David. Very helpful as I need to book my flights in the next days. James, as you described, my agency has always been really easy. But the new state-wide paperwork I had to acknowledge for 2018 changed to now require all the AWA detail (instead of just sending flight out and back into the States, and countries visited). They now want full itinerary (every flight and all addresses). Well that freaked me out. Glad to hear that even though you’ve provided that detailed info you were not visited at those addresses while you were there.
          Maybe I need to move to a non-Sorna compliant state.

        • Trish

          Not visited that you know of!

      • PK

        “my state didn’t require a “detailed itinerary” til now. New 2018 paperwork”.

        What paperwork exactly are you referring to? I’m a NY Registrant and I traveled in November. I called them and they had no clue about submitting an itinerary. Even though I did submit a half-baked certified letter based on the suggestion of my Attorney. Hopefully I wasn’t the cause …

        • Sam

          When I traveled outside New York they just wanted to know how long I was going to be gone and when I was going to be back and the flight numbers. I asked them if they wanted my passport number and they told me they didn’t need it. Pretty sure the form they had me fill out this past time when I moved out of the US didn’t ask for my passport number either.

        • E

          I’m in a Sorna compliant state; it was the new “Notice to Require to Register” paperwork I get every few years and the new verbiage about Int’l Travel had a lot more detail required than previous (all flights, all addresses, all cities, times, dates, yada yada). I don’t usually even know that info ahead of time! Used to be they just required my passport number, flights into and out of the USA, and countries visited. Craziness

        • AJ

          Just so everyone understands: not providing 21-day notice is a violation of Federal Law, period. Your State’s decision whether to comply or ignore its portion of AWA has zero effect on your requirement, as an individual, to comply. States are constitutionally protected from having to comply with what Congress says when it comes to regulation. Citizens are constitutionally bound to comply. So be aware that any time you travel, there is a chance of getting flagged in a federal database. From there, all it will take is a US Attorney trying to make a name or trying to be tough on crime, and you’re headed in a bad direction.

  7. FrankGP

    Just a comment on the phone conversation… if you have an iPhone with an iTunes account…
    Create a travel iTunes account, travel gmail account, etc.
    Set it all up and test before you go.
    When you leave back up your phone (your regular itunes account).
    Then factory reset and log into your travel itunes account and restore the backup created when you set it up.
    When you arrive, you can restore back to your regular account.
    Use the travel account when you come home, with just the nice ‘church’ pictures, etc.
    I have not tested this, but seems like it would work.
    Anyone tried anything like this?…

    • David Kennerly, A Jumped-Up Pantry Boy Who Never Knew His Place

      If I’m understanding your procedure correctly, and I’m not sure that I am, then, if you are wanting to “wipe” your phone before crossing U.S. Immigration, simply restoring the phone to its factory-fresh state may not accomplish your intended goal. I suspect that it will merely delete memory pointers and not the memory itself which could then be easily recovered by software that ICE uses all of the time. You may need to install a “wipe” program. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

  8. David

    I forgot to mention that I missed my flight!!🤤 So despite my best efforts to submit a 21-day-in-advance travel itinerary before my trip, the flight number and departure date changed. I informed the record’s person at the police department – via email – AFTER arriving in Europe and she said it was “no problem”.
    So there you have it – a flight change NOT 21 days prior – but the very day of – my departing flight ….. providing the information AFTER my flight occurred ….. and being told that it was “no problem”.
    So if this is “no problem” and since Angel Watch already has the airline passenger manifests (which they’ve long used for the green notices), what is the point of our submitting a 21-day-in-advance travel itinerary?? I appreciate the records officer’s understanding, but the truth is that that very understanding itself cinfirms the fact the 21-day-in-advance-notification is unnecessary! There’s no good reason for it!!! This charade is just another way for them to jerk our chains!! 😡

    • James

      The 21 Day Notice thingy really, really makes me unhappy…but I comply because, well, because I must, and so I shall for all the inconvenience this injects into my life.

      (actually, it makes travel very difficult, having to give 21 day notice)

      Unhappy face here.


      • AJ

        it makes travel very difficult, having to give 21 day notice
        Which flies (no pun intended) in the face of Smith, not to mention plenty of other case law about freedom to travel…including internationally. See Kent v. Dulles ( or Aptheker v. Sec’y of State (

        From Aptheker, at 505:
        In 1958, in Kent v. Dulles, 357 U. S. 116, 357 U. S. 127, this Court declared that the right to travel abroad is “an important aspect of the citizen’s liberty'” guaranteed in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The Court stated that: “The right to travel is a part of the ‘liberty’ of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values.
        Note the “across frontiers in either direction (i.e. international travel)” and “inside frontiers (i.e. domestic travel of any kind) phrases. The Government is depriving you of a liberty interest without due process as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. It doesn’t mean the Gov’t cannot do it, but it does mean it’s on them to show why it’s needed (it isn’t), and to ensure it’s narrowly tailored (it isn’t).

    • Tim Moore

      They could care less about our chains. All these little seemingly pointless requirements are there for the convenience of law enforcement, to use or not use as they see fit. They can bypass the process of getting a warrant if they suspect you of a real crime. So they think you were doing child sex tourism and can’t prove you weren’t. They can still arest you for not giving notice. The more little traps they put out the more likely you will fall in, and they can detain you, arrest you, question you, imprison you at will. They can can proclaim they are stopping a child sex criminal in any case, true or not. The public doesn’t ask for details.

      • Tim Moore

        Opps, correction. “So they think you were doing child sex tourism and can’t prove you weren’t.” I meant “were”. Arrest has two r’s also. Sorry, I am going to bed.

  9. Redeemed1

    I was just curious if there was anyone here who has traveled internationally after getting off the hit list? If so, did you try to inform anyone that you were leaving. I’m lucky to be in that boat and was just curious if I would have to do anything if I ever had the chance to take a trip to Europe. Thanks

    • Robert Entwistle

      I have been off the registry in New York since March of 2016. Since then I have been to Singapore and Indonesia a couple times, Malaysia and Hong Kong. I have not and did not notify anybody that I left and had absolutely no problem coming back into the states

      • Joe

        While the passport identifier applies ONLY to those currently registered based on an offense against a minor, the notification requirement language says “anyone convicted of a sex offense”.

        One of the plaintiffs in the original law suit had been relieved of registration, but was turned away from the destination country due to a Green notice anyway. The government’s response to that was “yeah that should not have happened”, but oh well.

        Also, on ACSOL conference calls about the subject ACSOL personnel RECOMMEND submitting the travel notice – to the last registering agency – for those relieved of registration, just to CYA.

        So, who knows?

        However, here is a FAQ sheet from the US Marshall’s Office which mirrors a State Department publication (which I cannot find at the moment).

        It says:

        Q: Can I personally submit an International Travel Form to the United States Marshals Service (USMS), National Sex Offender Targeting Center?

        A: No. All International Travel Notices must be completed and submitted by your local sex offender registry.

        Since there is no such thing as YOUR local sex offender registry, it would be damn impossible to properly provide the travel notice.

        So there is no definitive answer, but rather a personal call based on your (dis)comfort level with the whole scheme. The concept that a US Citizen – not on parole or probation, let alone not subject to this unconstitutional registration – must provide a, any travel notification, is so distasteful I do not even know where to begin. Travel restrictions were a big part of the reason the old USSR was considered the Evil Empire, and a sorry statement on the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

        Thank you Janice et. al.

        ps. please note on the USMS link above the complaint form for those affected.

        • Sam

          Did you also notice that their FAQ states

          “Whom does the International Megan’s Law apply to?

          The IML has notable provisions that may impact all registered sex offenders who intend to travel outside of the United States.”

          IML affects ALL registrants? Not just the ones who had a case against a minor.

        • R M

          The only viable source is what is put into law. I’m not sure the info on the USMS correctly states the details of the law. See

        • Sam

          This part really irritates me

          “The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Attorney General, and their agencies, officers, employees, and agents, shall not be liable to any person for any action taken under this section”

          Basically if shit hits the fan because of all of this, no one is at fault or can be sued. What kind of crap is that anyway? I’ve heard about covering your ass, but this is immunity to any horrible shit that happens to us because of these people.

        • TS

          @Joe, et al

          Please note the complaint form does not work when you try to open it. Interesting…


          Good catch. The “..may impact ALL…” is a catch all caveat phrase because travel notifications could impact ALL, whereas passport markings are for those who have convictions where a minor was involved. That is the the delineation.

        • David

          Sam, if a government employee is conducting his/her job duties “in good faith”, he/she has broad immunity from prosecution. (Yes, one could attempt to sue them, but it would be a steep uphill battle trying to prove that they were acting in bad faith.)

  10. J S

    I have been lurking this site for a long time, but I’d like someone to interpret this clause excerpted from International Megan’s Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders in layman’s term. I personally do not comprehend the mumbo jumbo. I am aware that you all are not an attorney or a legal analyst.

    Section 3 (10) (C)
    Foreign convictions; offenses involving consensual sexual conduct — The limitations contained in subparagraphs (B) and (C) of section 111(5) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 USC 16911(5)) shall apply with respect to a sex offense against a minor for purpose of this Act to the same extent and in the same manner as such limitations apply with respect to a sex offense for purposes of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006.

    Excerpt from the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 – 34 USC 20911 (5)(C) (Old code: 42 USC 16911 (5)(C))

    (C) Offenses involving consensual sexual conduct
    An offense involving consensual sexual conduct is not a sex offense for the purposes of this subchapter if the victim was an adult, unless the adult was under the custodial authority of the offender at the time of the offense, or if the victim was at least 13 years old and the offender was not more than 4 years older than the victim.

    Does it mean a person, who is a guilty of a sex offense against a minor but it was consensual, does not have to receive a special marked passport and submit a 21-day travel notification? Please clarify this if you can.


    • T

      The purpose of these advance notifications of the IML is only to prevent registrants whose conviction involves a minor from ever traveling overseas based on logical fallacy of risk of recidivism. The IML will never prevent any sexual crime through these advance notifications of traveling registrants (with convictions involving minors) and the government is doing this in a hypocritical manner of showing the world how tough they are against international sexual crime. But one day we will all eventually wake up to all this madness and say it’s crazy and ridiculous and won’t fall for this kind of mess, and to get rid of the IML.

    • Van

      Are you serious? A minor can never give permission period.

  11. T

    What the IML should have done instead of just sending advance notifications to prevent registrants from ever traveling and entering a country thinking they’ll commit future crime, instead do the notification process of travel but without advance notices being sent out to foreign government agencies, but let registrants travel freely and unmolested, but if that person gets caught in some criminal activity overseas and the US government is notified, then that’s when the notices should’ve got sent out about the individual that was caught, which should’ve been the least thing for the IML. Other then that, the IML is unconstitutional and punishment.

  12. bm

    I was refused to enter today Santo Domingo (DR). I went to DR 2016 and 2017 without any problems. Nobody explained the reason. It says you not allowed to enter. Do you know where I can find the reason?

    • James

      I’m sorry to hear this…but it has been general common knowledge that the Dominican Republic was refusing entry to RSO’s. I believe the DR was even listed on the RTAG Matrix, (which I can’t find at the moment).

      Could you please maybe give some details on how they detained you and turned you around? The mechanics of this, I suppose.


      Best Wishes, James

      • bm

        They scanned my passport and my daughter and wife and told just me that I am not allowed to enter DR. The USA government sent some notes. It’s confidential an officer told me. However I was their in 2016 and 2017 and my conviction is from 2011,involving 17 year old consensual relationships. Age of consent in our state is 17. The immigration officer followed me including drinking, bathroom everywhere until plane went into the sky. How I can find out from where and what kind of info they received?

        • AJ

          File a request with INTERPOL,which involves snail-mailing a request to France ( The USG may have used other avenues, but they almost certainly pinged I’POL to issue a Green Notice.

        • James

          It was an Angel’s Watch Interpol Notice…a green notice of your conviction. Angel’s Watch is a division of the US Marshal’s Service, I believe, though it could now be part of Customs and Border Protection.

          I am surprised to say that I don’t think that anyone has seen the Green Notice sent out on them, except for those few that had a brief view on a computer screen when being denied entry at whatever county they were trying to get into.

          This is a pretty politically savvy group of people here…and as noted it is surprising that no one has filed a Freedom of Information Request to see whatever is being sent out on themselves. I remember bringing this up a couple of years ago…and there was some kind of answer….maybe a prohibition from seeing Law Enforcement files….something like that. (I wish someone would correct me on this).

          1. Are you on a registry?

          2. Did you send or give the required 21 day Notice of International Travel as required by the International Megan’s Law? (though I thought the IML really applied to Minor’s, 14 and under convictions.)

          It is becoming obvious as I type this that there is a lot I don’t know…yours is an honest question, and my attempt to respond is sincere. But I don’t know.

          Hopefully others with more knowledge than I will chime in on your problem…which really is all of our problems. Personally, I used to travel frequently to Latin America and the Caribbean…but have not attempted travel anywhere except Europe since the passage of the IML.

          Let me try again…you could or should file a Freedom of Information Act request with CBP or the US Marshall’s Office. I don’t know if it will be successful, but this is the honest answer to your question.

          Good Luck, (and I am so sorry for your ordeal…or my detention was an ordeal so I presume yours was also).

          Best Wishes, James

  13. James

    Let me ask AJ a question since he responded while I was still typing my reply…;>}}

    Has anyone filed a request through INTERPOL? (or has it been denied as confidential at the request of the US Government?)

    Heck, if this were possible, a simple request for information to INTERPOL, I think I’d like to see what they are sending out on moi.

    Have other people filed such a request?


    Best Wishes, James

    • AJ

      The only instance I know of someone making the request was recently on here. Someone mentioned they’d done the request (not recently). I want to say they got a goose-egg for results, but cannot recall for certain.

      To my recollection, I’POL’s rules do not allow them to deny the request for self-info. I don’t recall whether or not redaction was part of the picture. What I gleaned from it is they would release all non-sensitive information in their files. I suppose it’s possible USG would want some stuff held back, but I think if that were the case, it would probably use a less transparent means than I’POL.

      I’m not sure I’ve properly or fully answered your question, but it’s all I have! 🙂

      (What sucks is there being no online method to request the info, nor a domestic mailing address. All requests go to France by post.)

      • James


        I appreciate this. I probably have to find my old passport and get the exact date South Korea detained me. And then make the request…if I do this, it probably helps everyone, (knowledge is everything and empowers)

        On the other hand, I have three, (I hope), important trips to Europe this year and I am not sure I want to attract attention to myself.

        This is always the problem.

        Thanks for your response. If I do anything with this, I will of course report back and let everyone know how it goes.

        Best Wishes, James

    • mch

      James & AJ

      I have filed a FOIA request with CBP out of curiosity. I did receive a couple of pages of dates when I crossed the border at San Ysidro returning from Baja. It gave the date, time and that I was sent to secondary, but all personal information had been deleted or blacked out. I had also requested from the FBI which only had my California arrest info and no action taken. I did also make a request to Interpol and they required a notarized proof of identity. I have yet to follow up on the request. My “international” travel was limited to driving into the tourist zones in Baja. My return trips had been uneventful; CBP was professional, at times jovial. They ran my passport, saw the dozens and dozens of times I have crossed the border, sent me to secondary, wait 10 minutes and back on the road. It had not been a problem.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *